On 02 Mar 2014, at 10:49, LizR wrote:
On 2 March 2014 21:33, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
Because "1+1=2" is elementary math, learned in high school.
" "1+1=2" is a fact " is a non trivial philosophical statement,
which involved a non trivial notion like "fact". I have seen people
discussing ad nauseam on what is a fact, and some philosopher would
not agree that elementary arithmetical statement can be considered
as fact.
(Bp is more "I believe in "1+1=2", or I can justify that 1+1=2).
OK, I think I see that.
But if you accept the Doctor's offer then you are committing to a
"capsule theory of identity" which implies most of what you have
said about duplication experiments with delays, VR, and so on.
OK. I would say "relative (to universal numbers) capsule theory of
identity".
I'm not sure I understand, what would be the alternative capsule
theory (i.e. one that isn't relative to universal numbers?)
Because the state that the doctor put on some disk has a sense only
relatively to the possible state of some other universal system.
In fact any number might defined your actual state relatively to
*some* universal system, itself making sense thanks to the local
"physical laws", for example. A number by itself does not refer to a
computational state, you need at least two numbers, or you need to
fix the base system, or to make precise the UD you work with. The
notion of computational state is relative. OK?
When everything is reduced to arithmetic, we have to take into
account this "relativity of relativity".
I think I get this, in an intuitive sort of way. It has seemed to me
from the start that numbers of themselves can't do anything - so
they must need to do so relative to something. But I probably need
to learn more to really understand this.
I am thinking about how to explain this.
When you say "numbers of themselves can't do anything" you are right.
But the point will be that "numbers + addition and multiplication"
can do the thing needed. And this in some absolute sense. In
particular, numbers +addition+multiplication, can do the universal
numbers, from which the relativity of the computational state will
emerge.
This should be much clear when we will derive machine's physics (and
machine's theology) from arithmetic.
Bruno
--
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
