On 27 July 2014 17:27, Jesse Mazer <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't see why that should follow at all, as long as there are multiple > infinite computations running rather than the UDA being the only one,
I may be missing some other point you're making, but I think this is already dealt with after Step 8 of the UDA (universal dovetailer argument). By this point in the argument, we have abandoned the notion of a "primitively-physical universe". Given that we are assuming CTM, we need some ontology to fix the notion of computation, and arithmetical relations suffice for this purpose. At this point, we're not interested in quibbling over the meaning of words like "existence", but rather in seeing what we can derive from a given assumption. Anyhow, if arithmetic is taken as the ontology, then given its sufficiency to fix the notion of computation, the existence of a "Programmatic Library of Babel" is already entailed. Such a Library must in particular contain "universal dovetailers" that themselves generate every possible program and execute each of them in sequence by means of dovetailing. This must include recursively regenerating themselves in an infinitely "fractal" manner. This characteristic implies a quite extraordinarily explosive regenerative redundancy. Hence it seems plausible a priori, even without a detailed calculus, that the resulting computational structure (i.e. the infinite trace of the UD, or UD*) must completely dominate any measure competition within the computational landscape defined by arithmetical truth (or the small part of it needed for the assumption). David -- 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/d/optout.
