On 23 Dec 2017, at 22:20, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:04:58AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 Dec 2017, at 00:56, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 05:25:12PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
What is the difference you make between an instrument recording the
result
and an observer? Consciousness? But that is what "Wigner's friend"
shows
difficult to admit, and besides, I thought we all agree that it is
better
that QM is the same for conscious and non conscious beings?
For me, the most important thing is the continuous/discrete
transition. I am ambivalent on whether this requires consciousness
or
not. The best examplar to think about IMHO is an analogue-digital
converter (aka A/D converter), for example the microphone input
circuit on your computer. Conceptually, this device converts an
input
voltage into a distinct number (eg 0-255). However, in actual fact
what it does physically is convert a voltage into a time-varying
voltage signal, conventionally interpreted as the zeros and ones
of a
number communicated serially into the computer (or alternatively,
fans
the voltages out into a parallel array of volatages). That
"conventionally interpreted" is the wiggle room that smuggles
consciousness back in the picture.
Nevertheless, the most important aspect is the contrast between the
continuous and the discrete. Its the FAPP in the zeroing out of
offdiagonal terms in the einselection picture, as just another
example. We could probably make most progress on the measurement
problem by focussing on just that distinction, and ignoring any
other
aspect of consciousness or observerhood, since the continuous/
discrete
distinction should not be controversial to anyone, and a lot in
known
mathematically about it.
It seems that you are assuming some physical universe, or at least
some
analytical universe. But with digital mechanism we can (and
apparently
should) assume only a digital discrete inductive structure (natural
number
with add and times, combinators with application and reduction,
etc.), and
the analytical becomes tools of the mind (and their appearance are
justified
from the discrete entities pov).
Not so assumed. Your FPI argument shows how observed physics has a
continuous character,
OK, but that is part of the consequence when assuming digital
mechanism. We got it, without assuming it, but we get it only in the
mind of the machine, it is phenomenological, like all the infinities
which will crop up.
yet the domain of knowledge is necessarily
discrete (digital mechanism).
Knowledge is continuous too. S4Grz1 (Bp & p, with p semi-computable,
leaf of the UD) semantic is a priori close to intuitionism, and, with
the "1" close to some quantum logic, but the semantics are
topological, continuous. Knowability and knowledge are not even
definable by the machine, as least the one concerning itself.
Only G seems to be confronted with the discrete, which is normal as we
assume some fragment of theory/model (N, 0, +, *) . The transition
between discrete and continuous is brought by the "non definable by
the machine" "& p". It is in between G and S4Grz, of between Z and X.
The machine knows that her soul (the knower, the owner of
consciousness, the one metadescribed by Bp & p) is not a machine, from
its first person view, and only: could be an (unknown) machine, if God
is OK with that, when she accept the digitalist surgeon proposition.
ISTM that computationalism proves the
rule, rather than being a counter example.
OK, as part of the consequences of mechanism, which might invalidated,
or not, your argument, but I lost the line. For me, with mechanism,
there is no measuremnt problem: Everett+Gleason solves the problem
completely, ... except that we have to extract the necessity of the
wave from arithmetical self-reference. But it works apparently,
although only the infinite future can show us wrong, if it is correct!
Cheers,
Bruno
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellow [email protected]
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
