On Friday, June 7, 2019 at 11:54:42 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 6 Jun 2019, at 19:34, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> [... *stuff on libertarianism*]
>
> I'm reminded of Bruno's theory that everything is computation…
>
>
> Just to be exact. My working hypothesis is “Indexical Digital Mechanism”.
> It is “YD + CT” to sum it all.
>
> My contribution is a theorem: which says that if we assume Mechanism, it
> is undecidable if there is more than the additive and multiplicative
> structure of the natural numbers, or Turing equivalent.
>
> But most things are not computation. The mixing of the codes of the total
> computable functions and the strictly partial one IS NOT computable, yet
> “arithmetically real” and this will have a role in the “first person
> indeterminacy” measure problem.
>
> If Mechanism is true, very few things are computable, or even deducible in
> powerful theory. Both consciousness and matter are typically not
> computable, yet absolutely real, for all Lôbian machines, from their
> phenomenological perspective.
>
> Every is numbers, or computations, which means we can limit the
> arithmetical reality to the sigma_1 sentences eventually, but that means
> only that the fundamental ontology is very simple. The interesting things,
> including god, consciousness and matter all get their meaning and laws from
> the phenomenological perspective.
>
> So, to say that with mechanism, that 'everything is computation’ is a bit
> misleading, as the phenomenologically apprehensible things will all be non
> computable, and yet are *real*, as we all know.
>
> For consciousness you need only to agree that it is
>
> True,
> Knowable,
> Indubitable,
> (Immediate),
>
> And
>
> Non-definable,
> Non Rationally believable
>
> Together with the invariance for some digital transformation at some
> description level.
>
>
>
>
> and so everything must be explainable in terms of computation.
>
>
> In terms of addition and multiplication, you can understand where
> consciousness come from, why it differentiates, and the transfinite paths
> it get involved into, and why Reality is beyond the computable, yet
> partially computable, partially and locally manageable, partially
> observable, partially and locally inductively inferable. Etc.
>
> Even just the arithmetical reality is far beyond the computable, but from
> inside, the sigma_1 (ultra-mini-tniy part of that reality) is already
> bigger than we could hope to formalise in ZF or ZF + Large cardinal.
>
> Digital mechanism, well understood (meaning with understand the quasi
> direct link between the Church-Turing thesis and incompleteness, (which I
> have explained many times, but I can do it again), is constructively
> antireductionist theory. The Löb-Gödelian machines, those who obeys to the
> probability/consistency laws of Solovays (cf G and G*) can defeat any
> complete theory anyone could conceive about them.
>
> Only numbers at the ontological level, OK, but the crazily interesting
> things appears at the phenomenological levels, where things are no more
> very computable at all.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
Today is the last day of *UCNC 2019*.
Program: http://www.ucnc2019.uec.ac.jp/program.html
What the conference is about can be summed up as
*What is computing*
if the CT thesis [
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church%E2%80%93Turing_thesis ] is *false*?
@philipthrift
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/71fdd53d-c433-4c6d-9c9a-347ee44103da%40googlegroups.com.
