On 3/7/2019 9:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 7 Mar 2019, at 05:48, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 3/6/2019 10:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I use mechanism in the sense that if little daemon substitute each piece of my
brain, at some resolution level, by functional digital equivalent, then my
consciousness would not notice the difference.
According to your theory, your consciousness is instantiated by the
computational threads of the universal dovetailer, which exists within
arithmetic. So whether a piece of your brain is present, replaced, or removed
should make no difference to you consciousness.
Proof?
Yes, at first sight, naively, the universal dovetailing predicts white rabbits,
or even white noise. But this is like forgetting the definition of the subject
given (the Gödel-Löbian machines), and the fact that the thread in the
Universal dovetailing is entirely structured by the nuance of provability
imposed by incompleteness.
Then the math shows that we get a quantum logic for the 3p physics, another
quantum logics for the 1p physics, and even (I was wrong in my original thesis)
a quantum logic for the 1p-soul. Plotinus was right on this, the soul has
already a foot in matter, even if that quantum logic is an intuitionist quantum
logic.
If I belong to a normal history, for those arithmetical quantum logic, where
some people decide to remove a piece of my brain, the probability will be high
that I will survive that lobotomic experience in the “continuum” of
continuations which are executed in the sigma_1 arithmetic (equivalent to a
universal dovetailing).
Why is the probability not 1.0. Why is there any effect at all in any
continuation? Why is experience dependent on physics, if it is just a
matter of timeless arithmetical relations.
Brent
And mechanism is not my theory. Nor is the G* theology, which is just the truth
theory of all classical Löbian machine, as demonstrate by the work of Gödel, Löb
and Solovay. I have not invented the intensional variants. ([]p & p) has been
discovered by Goldblatt and Boolos, well studied by Artemov. And yes, I point on
the existence of infinitely many others, some crucial to derive “Matter” from
arithmetic in the manner prescribed by Mechanism (or, actually Neoplatonism).
Bruno
Brent
--
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.
--
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.
