On 13 May 2015, at 17:49, David Nyman wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 14:53, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
I think it is a good summary, yes. Thanks!
Building on that then, would you say that bodies and brains
(including of course our own) fall within the class of embedded
features of the machine's generalised 'physical environment'? Their
particular role being the relation between the 'knower' in platonia
and the environment in general.
OK.
It might be vague, as in arithmetic we have a physical environment
itself part of a theological environment, so to speak.
At a 'low' level, the comp assumption is that the FPI results in a
'measure battle' yielding a range of observable transformations (or
continuations) consistent with the Born probabilities (else comp is
false).
OK (assuming the Born probabilities, but I do think those are theorems
in QM without collapse, and only QM must be derived, but Brent would
disagree, but it is technical).
A physics consistent with QM, in other words.
And with comp, and not eliminating consciousness.
But the expectation is also that the knower itself maintains its
capacity for physical manifestation in relation to the transformed
environment, in each continuation, in order for the observations to
occur.
Yes, indeed, a priori too much, but then we must do the math.
BTW, Bruce made the point that the expected measure of the class of
such physically-consistent observations, against the background of
UD*, must be very close to zero. ISTM that this isn't really the
point (e.g. the expected measure of readable books in the Library of
Babel must also be close to zero). What seems more relevant is the
presumed lack of 'un-physical' observer -environment relations (i.e.
not only 'why no white rabbits?' but 'why physics?'). From this
perspective, the obvious difference between the Library of Babel and
UD* is that the former must be 'observed' externally whereas the
latter is conceived as yielding a view 'from within'. Hence what
must be justified is why our particular species of internal observer
- i.e. the kind capable of self-manifesting within consistently
'physical' environments, should predominate.
It predominates because when there is too much white rabbits, you die,
and you wake up, where there are less white rabbits. But there is a
bottom (sort of) which is where you share the indeterminacy with
others, and have the stable first person plural "video game". This
means we are "collectively multiplied". Our type of consciousness
needs that "we" are rare, in deep history (in Bennett sense), yet
strongly multiplied, so that we slip on the verge of the physical
reality only in dream and death, or with brain perturbation technics.
We can test the classical theory on this. We can intuit it, in
different ways. With thought experiments, with math and with listening
to the others (machines), or with training in altered state of
consciousness (with all the caution needed of course).
It might be false, also.
Bruno
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.
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/d/optout.
