> On 3 Jul 2018, at 15:09, Lawrence Crowell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > These ideas about algorithms that can detect nonsense seem to run afoul of > Turing's proof there is no universal TM that can determine if all TMs can > halt or not. This is a form of the Berry paradox and similar "unnameable > number" results similar to Cantor diagonalization. Such a thing really does > not exist.
Indeed. But I do not see the relevance here. It means only that we cannot recognise a program from its behaviour in general, still less from its code. But everyone knows who he is locally, and that is only what we need to get the first person duplication when done (by definition/assumption) at the right level. That explains the “many-world” internal interpretation in arithmetic or Turing equivalent. Bruno > > LC > > On Tuesday, July 3, 2018 at 6:52:02 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 2 Jul 2018, at 20:46, John Clark <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected] >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >> >you claim to have an algorithm able to predict what anyone could live >> after a self-duplication. >> I have an algorithm that can detect gibberish and gibberish questions have >> no answer. The algorithm works this way, if even after the exparament is >> over its STILL impossible to say what the prediction was suposed to be about >> then the question about the future was gibberish. >> >> > > Both copies knows perfectly well how to answer them after. You reiterates > once more your intensional confusion, we can suspect, between fist person and > third person. Repeating an argument ad nauseam will not make it true. > > Bruno > > > > > >> >>And physics doesn't care if the Continuum hypothesis is true or not, >> because all the mathematics that physicists use would remain unchanged >> either way. >> >> >That is not obvious. Some key theorem on knots, which have been used in >> quantum gravitation were based on some studies on large cardinals >> >> Cantor's theorem about large cardinals would remain unchanged regardless of >> if the Continuum hypothesis is true or not, in fact it has nothing to do >> with any existing mathematics much less 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] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list >> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- 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.
