On 5/5/2019 10:10 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 3 May 2019, at 01:02, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 5/2/2019 8:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 1 May 2019, at 18:23, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 5/1/2019 1:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I am not sure I understand. By definition, the substitution level take into
account all what is relevant.
But definitions don't call the definidum into existence.??
Indeed. But I did not use a definition to claim any truth (of existence, or
else). Mechanism assumes that you have a brain, that computer exists
physically, that doctors exist, etc.
It does not assume that the physical existence is primary, though, and
eventually, the reasoning shows that the physical existence (which is never
doubted) is not primary.
By definition God is omnipotent.??
By*some* definition.
But that doesn't mean there's an omnipotent being.
On the contrary indeed. Nothing is omnipotent. Omnipotence and omniscience are
two inconsistent notions, even when taken in isolation.
I am not sure what was your point here Brent?
You wrote, "By definition, the substitution level take into account all what is
relevant." My point is that Holevo's theorem entails that there is lower bound on
the incompleteness of the substitution; so it is not at all clear that there is a
substitution level that takes into account all that is relevant. Simply saying there is
a definition of the term doesn't mean it refers.
Yes, so Mechanism might implied that we (as abstract immaterial
computational object) are above the Holevo bound. Simply. But now,
this is incorrect. Even if we need to go below that bound, like if
we have a quantum brain, there is still a possibility that we don’t
use the continuous information related to it, so we will still be
“reconstituted” in the arithmetical reality, and the reversal
physics/psychology-theology still occurs.
Mechanism would be false, if not only we are quantum machine, but
some infinite information is relevant, and if that infinite
information is not recoverable by the first person indeterminacy in
arithmetic. In that case mechanism is false, and materialism is
against consistent (but not yet necessarily true, note).
There is nothing in Holevo's theorem that implies the information is
infinite.
I agree, but it grows quickly by entanglement diffusion, even toward
infinity in an infinite physical universe.
Only that it is unobtainable. Mechanism might still be true.
Yes, that is why a QC cannot violate Church’s thesis. But the non
cloning is still a consequence of mechanism, and the non cloning
inferred from observation is a confirmation of Mechanism.
We don't know what detail is needed so that one "feels the same"
after replacing part or all ones brain by some Turing machine. It
might be be very little.
OK.
One the other hand it might makes the fact that one has been
duplicated obvious even if you still "felt" ("reported"?) you were
the same person. So I'm not clear on why you think your duplication
scenario is significant.
To understand that to make any prediction we need to take into account
all our “reconsistitutions” in the arithmetical reality. We cannot use
on ontological commitment (God or Universe) to select some
computation. Or we need to say “yes” to the doctor, and pray that God
to intervene to make that selection, but that is no more “mechanism”:
it is usual invocation of a god (personal or non personal). That is
what the physicists do all the time, when they do a prediction and
verify it. With mechanism, the measure “one” (say) has to be derived
from the statistics on all first person experience supported by all
computations. That works well at the propositional level, thanks to
the Gödel-Löb-Solovay G*.
That sounds completely circular attempt to define the individual. All
/*our*/ reconstitutions are derived from as /*our*/ statistic from all
experiences.
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.
