On 3/10/2021 7:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 9 Mar 2021, at 20:06, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 3/9/2021 5:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 6 Feb 2021, at 20:27, John Clark <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Parallel Worlds Probably Exist. Here’s Why
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTXTPe3wahc&t=7s>
John K Clark
My comment there:
<<
Why to assume even one universe? We know since the 1930s that all
models of elementary arithmetic execute all computations, and that
no universal machine can know which computations support it, and
indeed that if the machine looks below at itself (and environment)
its Mechanist Substitution level, she has to see the statistical
impact of the "parallel computation". The only problem is that the
wave itself must be explained by the logics of
machine self-reference mathematics, and that is what I did (already
in the 1970s, but I took it as an argument against Mechanism, as I
was not aware that the physicists were already there. The advantage
is a simpler "theory of everything" (elementary arithmetic or Turing
equivalent), but also that we get very naturally the
qualia/quanta distinctions. This if unfortunately not well known,
and of course physicalist or materialist philosophers hate this,
as physics become reducible to pure arithmetic/computer science.
>>
We do have evidence for a physical reality, but we don’t have any
evidence that the physical reality if the fundamental reality, and I
can argue that we have a lot of evidence that the fundamental
reality is not physical, but arithmetical. We have even a proof once
we assume the (indexical and digital) Mechanist hypothesis in the
cognitive science (not in the physical science).
Whatever explains every possibility, fails to explain anything at all.
That is how Deustch refuted Schmidhuber, perhaps, but it does not
refute mechanism and its consequences, and indeed, the theory explains
what we observe, and discard what we don’t observe, and this not just
for the observable but also the sensible, the justifiable, etc.
You might critique all theories of everything, as they explain
everything, but that is interesting only if we can make prediction,
both positive and negative, like physical laws. But with mechanism we
have an explanation of where the physical laws come from, and why they
give rise to sharable quanta, and non sharable qualia.
A good example. You have an explanation of where physical laws come
from because you have theory that explains every possible physical law
(according to you).
Physics fails. Not only it has not yet any unique theory of the
universe, but two contradicting theories, but it does not address at
all the question of consciousness, for good reason: it fails on this.
It uses an identity thesis incompatible with Mechanism, used already
in Darwin and in Molecular Biology. That is why strict materialist
believer
There's a big difference between being a believer and a scientist. I'm
content to regard problems as unsolved until someone finds a solution.
Brent
come up with the idea that consciousness is an illusion (but that is
non-sensical), or just eliminate persons and consciousness altogether,
which is not really satisfying…
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e386a89d-c7e6-136e-be96-d2be0682e31d%40verizon.net
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e386a89d-c7e6-136e-be96-d2be0682e31d%40verizon.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/D85A8911-5DBA-4295-89DD-95D42853FC82%40ulb.ac.be
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/D85A8911-5DBA-4295-89DD-95D42853FC82%40ulb.ac.be?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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/748bc420-4f8e-525b-a5f1-d9acc723681e%40verizon.net.
