On 17 Mar 2012, at 15:56, Stanley N Salthe wrote:

Bruno -- As an idealist, I think you have it all backward!

`I am not an idealist. Just a logician and an inquirer. I show that if`

`you believe in a sufficient amount of arithmetic, and in the`

`assumption that your (generalized) brain(*) is Turing emulable, then`

`it follows that the mind body problem is two times more difficult to`

`solve: not only you need some theory of mind, but you have to derive`

`the beliefs in matter from it.`

`I don't pretend this is obvious. The key notion is the notion of 1-`

`indeterminacy, which makes machines unable to know which universal`

`machine computes them among an infinity of machines.`

`I have no clue about the truth. I assume mechanism, that is: the`

`invariance of my consciousness through the digital functional`

`substitution of my parts at some description level. I show that it`

`needs some revision in ... theology (to be short).`

`It makes mechanism also scientifically testable, by deriving physics`

`from machine't theology (the argument shows that physics is uniquely`

`defined), and compare with nature.`

`(*) The generalized brain is the portion of the physical universe that`

`you have to emulate to get the existence of your consciousness`

`relatively perpetuated. It exists by the comp assumption.`

I would argue that cardinal numbers are the most 'crisp' entitiesthat we know, and this disqualifies them or being primeval.

`It is not just the number, but their additive and multiplicative`

`structure. It is Turing complete. In fact any first order logical`

`specification of a Turing complete structure will do.`

`Consciousness and matter does not depend on the choice of the initial`

`universal system in the theory. I use numbers only because most`

`people are familiar with them.`

That is, I think it makes sense to see all developments asbeginning relatively vaguely and then becoming more definite overtime. So, then, it will have taken these numbers a very long periodof evolution (passing through the 'real' stage) to have become asdefinite as they are now. Or, even if cardinal numbers became quitecrisp at the time, say, of the origin of chemistry, that too willhave been a long way from primeval.

`I can explain why numbers are confronted to the continuum, indeed also`

`the physical.`

The problem is that it is a long reasoning.

`I don't want to impose anything, and certainly not the "truth" of`

`mechanism, just the point that mechanism and materialism are not`

`compatible, and if we bet on mechanism, the mind-body problem is`

`transformed into a precise, but complex, problem in machine's`

`theology, itself branch of number theory and metamathematics.`

`I am not sure that anything I say should change your interest or that`

`it would contradict most posts here. What I am saying concerns the`

`fundamental matter. There, in soccer game language, I would sum by`

`Aristotle 0, Plato 1. But it is not the last match, and it changes`

`only the global picture.`

`I share many intuitions here, and with INBIOSA, even if I start from`

`what might seems a bit revulsing to many: discrete integers and number-`

`crunching machines, but by taking into account the 1-view/3-view`

`distinction, that we can partially formalise for machine, we can`

`understand that we might have just been guilty of having developed a`

`reductionist conception of numbers and machines.`

`Arithmetic is not just full of life. Angels, goddesses, and other`

`oracles are also at play :)`

Bruno

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>wrote:On 16 Mar 2012, at 18:43, Guy A Hoelzer wrote:Greetings All,While I like to think that I am not limited to reductionisticthinking, I find it difficult to understand any perspective oninformation that is not limited to physical manifestation. I wouldappreciate further justification for a non-physicalist perspectiveon information. How can something exist in the absence of physicalmanifestation?If you are realist about elementary arithmetic, that is if you agreethat elementary arithmetical proposition like "17 is prime" are trueindependently of you, then, by arithmetic's Turing universality, youcan show that the numbers exchange information relatively touniversal numbers, which are playing the role of relativeinterpreters.I am not interested in a metaphysical perspective here, whichmight have heuristic value even if it is not 'real'. The issue of'content' and 'meaning' strikes me as entirely physical, somentioning those issues doesn't help me understand what non-physical information might be. I would say that if information isphysically manifested by contrasts (gradients, negentropy, …), thencontent or meaning refers to the internal dynamics of complexsystems induced by interaction between the system and thephysically manifested information. If there is no affect oninternal dynamics, then the system did not 'perceive' theinformation. If the information merely causes a transientfluctuation of the internal dynamics, then the perceivedinformation was not meaningful to the system. At least this is asketch of my view that I hope illustrates why the notions of'content' and 'meaning' does not depart the physical realm for me.I can prove that if we are machine at some description level, thenthe physical is both ontologically and epistemologically emergingfrom numbers relation. The hypothesis of mechanism can be shownlogically incompatible with very weak form of materialism. Physicscan not be fundamental, it emerges from mathematics, indeed fromwhat has been called the sharable part of mathematics (sharablebetween classical logicians and intuitionist logicians, it isbasically arithmetic or something recursively equivalent). We canalready derive propositional quantum logic from classical numberself-reference. Arithmetic is full of life at the start, and matterappears to be arithmetical truth as seen from "inside".Poetically, to be short, numbers dreams, and physical realities aredream sharing. The quantum emerges, if mechanism is correct, from astatistics on all computations. This makes both matter andconsciousness NON Turing emulable. In particular digital physics canbe shown self-contradictory. Those (actually old) results are notwell known but have been verified by many people. I don't thinkthere is a flaw, but we never can be sure, of course.Bruno Marchal PS see below for a concise version of the proof: http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.htmlRegards, GuyFrom: Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es<mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>>Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 04:19:31 -0700To: Foundations of Information Science Information Science <fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>>Subject: Re: [Fis] Physics of computing Dear discussants,I tend to disagree with the motto "information is physical" iftaken too strictly. Obviously if we look "downwards" it is OK, butin the "upward" direction it is different. Info is not onlyphysical then, and the dimension of self-construction along therealization of life cycle has to be entered. Then the signal, theinfo, has "content" and "meaning". Otherwise if we insist only inthe physical downward dimension we have just conventionalcomputing/ info processing. My opinion is that the notion ofabsence is crucial for advancing in the upward, but useless in thedownward.By the way, I already wrote about info and the absence theme in a1994 or 1995 paper in BioSystems...best ---Pedrowalter.riof...@terra.com.pe<mailto:walter.riof...@terra.com.pe>escribió:Thanks John and Kevin to update issues in information, computation,energy and reality.I would like point out to other articles morefocused in howcoherence and entanglement are used by living systems (far fromthermal equilibrium):Engel G.S., Calhoun T.R., Read E.L., Ahn T.K., Mancal T., ChengY.C., Blankenship R.E., Fleming G.R. (2007) Evidence for wavelikeenergy transfer through quantum coherence in photosyntheticsystems. Nature, 446(7137): 782-786.Collini E., Scholes G. (2009) Coherent intrachain energy inmigration in a conjugated polymer at room temperature. Science,vol. 323 No. 5912 pp. 369-373.Gauger E.M., Rieper E., Morton J.J.L., Benjamin S.C., Vedral V.(2011) Sustained Quantum Coherence and Entanglement in the AvianCompass. Phys. Rev. Lett., 106: 040503.Cia, J. et al, (2009) Dynamic entanglement in oscillatingmolecules. arXiv:0809.4906v1 [quant-ph]Sincerely, Walter ________________________________ _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis -- ------------------------------------------------- Pedro C. Marijuán Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud Avda. Gómez Laguna, 25, Pl. 11ª 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Telf: 34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) Fax: 34 976 71 5554 pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es<mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fishttp://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis _______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

_______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis