On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote:
* >Is that even relevant. Brains are presumably psuedo-classical objects. > But they can't be strictly classical, so it seems likely that it is > impossible to exactly duplicate a brain. * > Brains can't be duplicated exactly nor can any physical object, but mind is not a physical object and if mind works on digital principles, and I think it must, then mind could theoretically be duplicated exactly. If the duplication was not perfect, if it was way way off then it COULD feel the split, the copy would say to itself, "something just changed, I feel very differently than I did 2 seconds ago", and he probably wouldn't like the change because imprecise copies are usually (but not always) worse than the original not better. > *> So there will be a quick diveregence at the quantum level and that will > eventually (30sec ?) be amplified to some classical/computational > difference. * > That's true but I don't see the relevance of randomness (aka a event without a cause) if your talking about intelligence, consciousness or self determination. It's as if on rare and random times for no reason whatsoever a Turing Machine prints a 0 when the rules say it should have printed a 1. > > > *But no matter how great the difference there's no reason to suppose "the > split" will be "felt".* > I agree, provided the digital data was copied perfectly or near perfectly. 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.
