On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:15 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > it is true independently of me verify it or not. That is why I can say > that I am sure that Goldbach conjecture is true or not, that Riemann > hypothesis is true or not. I accept the excluded middle > I agree, but that doesn't guarantee that we will ever find a way to determine if they are true or not even in theory. And truth alone can't DO anything, and yet we know for certain that stuff gets done. Without matter that obeys the laws of physics the truth or falsehood of Goldbach or Riemann is irrelevant, neither can DO diddly squat. > >> >> But without access to matter that obeys the laws of physics truth alone >> can't DO anything. > > > > > Why? > Because of induction. In the entire history of the world nobody has ever made even the simplest calculation without using matter that obeys the laws of physics and nobody has even come close to doing so; I therefore use induction to conclude that more likely than not nobody ever will. As to why existence is organized in this way I don't pretend to understand, all I know is that it probably is. >> >> >> The relationship that a truth has with another truth, or even with a >> untruth, never changes, it's completely static. And consciousness is not >> static and neither is intelligence. > > > > > I never herad you defending the idea that time is primitive? > I don't know if time is a primitive or not but I do know that time is just one dimension, there are *at least* 3 more. > > > You are arguing aganist any notion of block universe, like Prigogine, and > Stephen Paul King. > If the block universe were homogeneous then neither consciousness nor intelligence could exist but obviously it is not, there are variations. >> >> It would be trivially easy to write a program that would generate all >> correct textbooks in mathematics and physics of 1000 pages or less, but it >> would be *ASTRONOMICALLY* more difficult to generate **only** correct >> textbooks in mathematics and physics of 1000 pages or less; and it could >> not even be attempted without matter that obeys the laws of physics. > > > > You confuse babel library with the universal dovetailer, which write only > correct programs, > I don't confuse a damn thing. Neither a "universal dovetailer" nor anything else can write *ONLY* correct programs (or *ONLY* correct anything) without the use of matter that obeys the laws of physics. John K Clark > -- 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.
