On 22 Dec 2017, at 16:21, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
On Wednesday, December 20, 2017 at 6:36:39 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
On 19 Dec 2017, at 20:08, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 4:48:48 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 Dec 2017, at 00:34, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
That makes things worst. Toy will make physical outcomes directly
dependent of the consciousness/knowledge of the observer.
Why do you and Clark persist in this error? Collapse, if it occurs,
does NOT depend on human consciousness.
OK but what you said made it depending of consciousness. There is
no collapse possible with the SWE, so what is the collapse? All
theories introducing a collapse in between the consciousness of the
observer and the observed objects seem highly speculative to me.
Measurement is just a specific instance of decoherence. There have
been "effective measurements" for billions of years.
OK. But not just in the universal wave, also in arithmetic, and
Mechanism forces them to be equivalent at some level, in a verifiable
way/
What is proved is that in all theories rich enough to add and
multiplied distinguishable inductive termes, like numbers, or
combinators, universal numbers and universal combinators exists, and
we have to retrieved physics from arithmetic using the self-
referential abilities of the universal machines (the Löbian chatty one).
Chert or flint carry cosmic ray tracks, which indicate particles
(likely muons) had their wave functions reduced with the interaction
of the rock material many millions of years ago.
Not at all. When *we* do a measurement w just localized ourselves in
the universal wave/matrix (it works in all pictures). The wave never
collapse. I like feynman when he describe the collapse as a collective
hallucination. It is exactly what Mechanism ensures.
I have a hard time thinking that a geologist looking at this has
performed a quantum measurement that reduces the wave function then
and there. It does not do much to invoke life either, for I doubt
that an unusually smart trilobite or cockroach in the Paleozoic
epoch would perform a measurement with some conscious idea of QM.
The measurement apparatus is a large number of quantum states which
interact with a quantum system in some prepared state. This then
results in the outcome of the needle or needle state. Ultimately I
see this as a process whereby a set of qubits, thought of as quantum
symbol strings or sets, encode quantum numbers. This then leads to
an axiomatic incompleteness of QM, or the Schrodinger wave equation.
We then have a breakdown of the quantum postulates as a sort of
incompleteness of physical axioms to predict an actual outcome. One
does not need to invoke consciousness to understand this.
If mechanism is true, the theology of the machine, including physics,
is "theory" independent. You need only a theory capable of mimicking a
(Turing) Universal machinery. Very elementary arithmetic is enough.
The rest are the standard classical definition of belief, knowledge,
and a notion of observabmle based on the mechanist thought experiences.
I often gives three explicit theories (Q, SK-combinator, and a
Matiyazevic-Jones system of diophantine equations).
It is part of the mechanist mind-body problem to retrieve physics from
any of those Turing complete theories. The advantage of using self-
reference is that we get the difference between true, rationally
communicable, rational knowledge, observable, etc, but also the logic
of the non-rationally-justifiable, the non-ovservable, etc. Those are
not empty due to the incompeleteness incarnated in the difference
between two modal logics G and G* inherited by the intensional variant
itself imposed by incompleteness.
Consciousness may however be some aspect of this self-reference.
You cannot limit it to anything "physical" or "empirical a priori",
without cheating, and preventing the distinction between qualia and
quanta.
It then could be possible that in some subtle way consciousness
plays some role in the physical universe.
To be short: It creates it completely. NUMBER ==> CONSCIOUSNESS ===>
PHYSICAL LAWS
Necessarily, when assuming a precise, weak, classical (in the logician
sense) version of Mechanist hypothesis in the cognitive science (not
in physics).
It might be in making measurements of physics in the earliest
universe. This might serve to reduce quantum states appropriate for
conscious life. Think of this as a sort of cosmic Wheeler Delayed
Choice Experiment. There may be some ergodic principle at work as
well, where an ensemble of IGUS/ET beings make measurements and the
physical outcome is an mean of their measured outcomes.
I agree with many of what you say for quantum mechanics, except you
seem to believe in some collapse of the wave, which I see only as an
indexical memorable happening in a machine or number history. This is
always relative to some universal machinery, in a local way, with
local in some technical (and non physical) sense.
I sum up many life works, not always well known like Löb and Solovay
theorem, but also Plato (theaetetus, parmenides) or personal insight
by people remembering their dreams, manly the contralucid one. I don't
claim it is true, still less obvious, .. there are reason to suspect
the fundamental truth to be counter-intuitive.
Bruno
LC
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
