On 21 Apr 2017, at 21:20, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Physical computation needs matter, because a physical
computation is a mathematical computation implemented in a physical,
material, environment. But computations does not need matter,
Suppose just for the sake of argument that non-physical
computations did not exist, how would our physical world be different?
It would like if the number 2 does not exist. Well, using the
reversal, it would mean there is no physical universe possible at all.
Computation and "universal machine" are non physical notions,
discovered independently by mathematicians working in the foundations
of mathematics.
They are known, since long, to be arithmetical notions, even sigma_1
arithmetical notion.
We have some evidence that there is a physical reality which can
implement computations, but that does not entail that the physical
reality is primary. On the contrary, the fact that the physical
reality can implement computations might suggest already that the
physical reality might emerge from computations. Then computationalism
show that this has to be the case. If some primary matter can select a
computations, or select a set of computations, then, either it uses
non computable elements, and we can no more say "yes" to the doctor
(computationalism is false), or it does no use those non computable
elements, but then the way that primary matter act will appears in the
universal dovetailing or arithmetic.
Bruno
There would be no difference. Therefore either non-physical
computations do not exist or they do but are utterly unimportant,
rather like the luminiferous aether.
> Mathematical computations exist in arithmetic, in the sense
that they can be shown to exists in all interpretations of Robinson
Arithmetic [...]
Oh no, we're back to Robinson Arithmetic again! It's time for you
to put your money where your mouth is, it's time for you to start
the Robinson Computer Corporation and become the richest man on
earth.
> Here you beg the question of materialism by defining
"computation" by "physical implementation of a mathematical
computation".
Definitions suck. Examples rule.
>> So which ONE of us has "THE 1-p you"?
> Both.
If it can't distinguish anything then why the hell did you invent
the idiotic term??
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 https://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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
