Edgar, We recently learned on this list that a Turing machine does not halt based on real numbers and apparently can only halt for the natural numbers. I wonder if that may correspond to your claim of the computations of nature being different from the computations of humans. If I remember correctly you referred to the former as R computations and the latter as H computations. Richard
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Russell, > > And, as I mentioned, there is exhaustive evidence from cognitive science, > and the sciences of physiology and perception, of the many specific > different ways that humans DO model an external reality in their internal > mental models of reality. > > Why do you just reject all this well documented science out of hand? > > Edgar > > On Sunday, February 16, 2014 6:54:48 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 01:40:15PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> > Russell, >> > >> > Well, there is overwhelming evidence of many sorts. The very fact that >> you >> > and I can even communicate about this issue is one proof, unless you >> think >> > I'm just a pesky figment of your imagination! >> >> It is evidence only of an intersubjective reality. That there is a >> common reality (to us) that we can agree on. Indeed, COMP, to take one >> theory of consciousness, predicts the existence of such an >> intersubjective >> reality. But, it is not evidence of a reality independent of all >> observers. >> >> > >> > And of course that can't possibly be true since I was here just fine >> before >> > I ever met you.... >> > >> > The obvious fact that we have to eat and breathe to survive, unless you >> > believe that just imagining food and oxygen is enough to sustain us. >> > >> >> That is evidence of the Anthropic Principle (there is much stronger >> evidence of that too), ie what we observe as reality must be >> consistent with our existence within that reality. The Anthropic >> Principle >> does not imply an observer independent reality - that would be a >> reverse syllogism fallacy. >> >> > So again I would say you are confusing the internal simulation of >> reality >> > that all minds produce, and that everyone thinks is the real world he >> lives >> > in, with the real external reality that all minds simulate each in >> their >> > own way. >> > >> >> Keep going. You still haven't provided any evidence that this "real >> external reality" actually exists! Until you do so, I will state that >> there is nothing here to confuse. Of course, if you actually succeed, >> not only will many people be surprised, you will undoubtedly be the >> most famous philosopher since Aristotle and Plato. >> >> Cheers >> >> -- >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) >> Principal, High Performance Coders >> Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] >> University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
