Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 28 May 2013, at 19:27, Richard Ruquist wrote: Bruno, In my model which you have already said is not comp, all the computational histories happen in a mindspace and only one of them become physical. Yes, that is what makes it into a non-comp theory, a bit like Bohm's hidden variable theory. In that case, the notion like particles, universes, in fact the whole physical, seem to be build-in unexplainable. Bruno Richard On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 May 2013, at 20:44, Richard Ruquist wrote: Bruno, With MWI are some universes less probable than others. Only relatively to some state, some computational histories are less probable. It is open if there is a more stringer notion of probable universe. Actually it is an open question is the notion of physical multiverse make sense. There are only coherence conditions on (sharable) dreams. Keep in mind that I am only translating a problem in math. Then it is almost obvious it is more a platonist theology than an Aristotelian theology. No one knows which one is correct. I have difficulty understanding how a universe can be statistical. I have difficulty understanding how a universe can be. I think I understand the frequency argument. But that does not make sense either. ? Feel free to explain why. I think it is simpler to forget the notion of physical universe, and to concentrate on the computational histories as seen by a machine/number. Obviously, neoneo-platonism is very young, and an infinity of problems are awaiting us there. Bruno Richard On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 May 2013, at 19:10, meekerdb wrote: On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe isinfinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/ infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. FPI = First Person Indeterminacy. When you look at your body, or neighborhood, below your level of substitution what comp predicts you will see, is the trace of the infinitley many computations which go through your state. That's how the FPI makes this one resulting from a statistical sum. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. How does that then comport with everything happens, because it's NOT the case that everything happens here. Every possible subjective experience happens, , related to the many computations (in arithmetic) but with different relative probabilities. Comp makes the physical reality more solid, as it show it to rely on eternal statistics on atemporal number relations. Everything physical happens is really the p - BDp explained by the LUMs' theology, and it is more like shit happens, to be short. (I explain the math on the FOAR list if you are interested). Bruno Brent Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 27 May 2013, at 20:44, Richard Ruquist wrote: Bruno, With MWI are some universes less probable than others. Only relatively to some state, some computational histories are less probable. It is open if there is a more stringer notion of probable universe. Actually it is an open question is the notion of physical multiverse make sense. There are only coherence conditions on (sharable) dreams. Keep in mind that I am only translating a problem in math. Then it is almost obvious it is more a platonist theology than an Aristotelian theology. No one knows which one is correct. I have difficulty understanding how a universe can be statistical. I have difficulty understanding how a universe can be. I think I understand the frequency argument. But that does not make sense either. ? Feel free to explain why. I think it is simpler to forget the notion of physical universe, and to concentrate on the computational histories as seen by a machine/number. Obviously, neoneo-platonism is very young, and an infinity of problems are awaiting us there. Bruno Richard On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 May 2013, at 19:10, meekerdb wrote: On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA fora long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. FPI = First Person Indeterminacy. When you look at your body, or neighborhood, below your level of substitution what comp predicts you will see, is the trace of the infinitley many computations which go through your state. That's how the FPI makes this one resulting from a statistical sum. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. How does that then comport with everything happens, because it's NOT the case that everything happens here. Every possible subjective experience happens, , related to the many computations (in arithmetic) but with different relative probabilities. Comp makes the physical reality more solid, as it show it to rely on eternal statistics on atemporal number relations. Everything physical happens is really the p - BDp explained by the LUMs' theology, and it is more like shit happens, to be short. (I explain the math on the FOAR list if you are interested). Bruno Brent Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) It eliminates the person, in theory first, in camp, slavery, our gulag, after. It is a constant in human history, and it is what gives to religions (including materialist and atheist one) their bad
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 28 May 2013, at 01:42, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: In a way, professor, Marchal, you seem to be on the side of Stephen Wolfram, who once wrote about there being no need to ever do SETI, because, if we wanted to know advanced Extra Terrestrial technologies, it would be far, simpler to generate algorythems (sp) that contain these unknown civilizations. I tried to search and see if Dr. Wolfram eloborated on this strange, proposal, but seemingly, he did not. I am clueless, over what bit-stream one would run, and on what type of computer, we'd require to accomplish what Wolfram, once proposed. Perhaps Wolfram was just hand-waving, and merely exercising his imagination? Wolfram use machines as metaphor, and is not aware of the FPI once you assume you can survive with a digital brain. So there are relationship, but big difference. Someother, perhaps Wolfram, seems to believe that the entire physical universe is a digital computer. It is the digital physics hypothesis (DPH). This is self-contradictory, as DPH implies comp, but comp implies physics is not entirely Turing emulable (by the UDA for example). But I like very cellular automata, I share this with Wolfram and others. I don't use them, as they are already a bit physical, assuming digital line, plane, etc. The real physics of the universal machine is independent of the choice of the initial universal base. Bruno Mitch -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, May 27, 2013 4:26 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 27 May 2013, at 05:05, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Understood, Jason. I became familiar with this digital universe concept, first, through Hans Moravec, in Mind Children. I wonder how possible it is to discover that we are part of an ancestor simulation? By reasoning, taking the FPI into consideration. We cannot discover this, but evaluate the probability, which might be high indeed. By the FPI, our consciousness relied on all computations (infinity) which is going through you state. In a sense, you are both in the simulations by ancestors (which exist in arithmetic) and all the other simulations, which exist also in arithmetic. Bruno -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, May 25, 2013 10:00 pm Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 5/25/2013 11:03 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM, lt;spudboy...@aol.comgt; wrote: Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person- thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. Mitch, Consider a few points: First, roughly 100 billion humans have ever lived in this history of humans, the life expectancy of humans over most of that time was 10 years, so roughly there have been 1 trillion years worth of human experience. Second, if transhumanism is correct and we transcend our biological limits we could not only live much longer but generate experiences at greatly accelerated rates. It would take the then current population of people (say it is 10 billion) only 100 years to generate the same total amount of experience of all humans going back millions of years. Even if only 10% of the population, spends only 1% of their time simulating/ experiencing alternate lives or histories, it would take a mere 100,000 years for most of human experiences to be generated artificially by our descendents. This ignores the acceleration that is possible. Electricity flows through wires about a million times faster than neurotransmitters conduct signals in the brain.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having toextract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) It eliminates the person, in theory first, in camp, slavery, our gulag, after. It is a constant in human history, and it is what gives to religions (including materialist and atheist one) their bad reputation. Read La Mettrie and Sade to learn more on this. Bruno Brent It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6358 - Release Date: 05/25/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything- l...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 27 May 2013, at 05:05, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Understood, Jason. I became familiar with this digital universe concept, first, through Hans Moravec, in Mind Children. I wonder how possible it is to discover that we are part of an ancestor simulation? By reasoning, taking the FPI into consideration. We cannot discover this, but evaluate the probability, which might be high indeed. By the FPI, our consciousness relied on all computations (infinity) which is going through you state. In a sense, you are both in the simulations by ancestors (which exist in arithmetic) and all the other simulations, which exist also in arithmetic. Bruno -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, May 25, 2013 10:00 pm Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 5/25/2013 11:03 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM, lt;spudboy...@aol.comgt; wrote: Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person- thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. Mitch, Consider a few points: First, roughly 100 billion humans have ever lived in this history of humans, the life expectancy of humans over most of that time was 10 years, so roughly there have been 1 trillion years worth of human experience. Second, if transhumanism is correct and we transcend our biological limits we could not only live much longer but generate experiences at greatly accelerated rates. It would take the then current population of people (say it is 10 billion) only 100 years to generate the same total amount of experience of all humans going back millions of years. Even if only 10% of the population, spends only 1% of their time simulating/ experiencing alternate lives or histories, it would take a mere 100,000 years for most of human experiences to be generated artificially by our descendents. This ignores the acceleration that is possible. Electricity flows through wires about a million times faster than neurotransmitters conduct signals in the brain. This implies that without any miniaturization, human thought could be accelerated by about a factor of a million times, so it could take only a month (rather than 100,000 years) for these accelerated humans spending only 0.1% of their collective time simulating ancestors for the bulk of human experience to be artificially generated. Now consider that such a civilization could live for billions of years. If each post-human experiences a few thousand or a few million ancestor lives, or alternate species, etc., then odds quickly become overwhelming that your current moment of awareness is not explained by that of some biological being on a physical planet but that of some advanced being conducting a simulation on some advanced computational substrate. Jason -Mitch -Original Message- From: Jason Resch lt;jasonre...@gmail.comgt; To: Everything List lt;everything-list@googlegroups.com gt; Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, lt;spudboy...@aol.com gt; wrote:
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. How does that then comport with everything happens, because it's NOT the case that everything happens here. Brent Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) It eliminates the person, in theory first, in camp, slavery, our gulag, after. It is a constant in human history, and it is what gives to religions (including materialist and atheist one) their bad reputation. Read La Mettrie and Sade to learn more on this. Bruno Brent It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6358 - Release Date: 05/25/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6360 - Release Date: 05/26/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. Because it is a statistical sum on the infinity of computation going through *your current state*. FPI means First Person Indeterminacy... so if it was not based on first person it would cleary not means anything... but as it is in its definition, you're just looking too far from what Bruno said. Quentin You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. How does that then comport with everything happens, because it's NOT the case that everything happens here. Brent Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) It eliminates the person, in theory first, in camp, slavery, our gulag, after. It is a constant in human history, and it is what gives to religions (including materialist and atheist one) their bad reputation. Read La Mettrie and Sade to learn more on this. Bruno Brent It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6358 - Release Date: 05/25/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6360 - Release Date: 05/26/13 -- 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
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/27/2013 10:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. Because it is a statistical sum on the infinity of computation going through *your current state*. But my question was what does a statistical sum mean? It doesn't help to explain that it is a statistical sum. But now you also use another term that is not really clear to me: your current state Is this a state of my experience? My experience doesn't consist of discrete states, so I'm not clear on what this refers to. Is it only my *consciousness that counts as my state? Brent FPI means First Person Indeterminacy... so if it was not based on first person it would cleary not means anything... but as it is in its definition, you're just looking too far from what Bruno said. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 5/27/2013 10:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. Because it is a statistical sum on the infinity of computation going through *your current state*. But my question was what does a statistical sum mean? It doesn't help to explain that it is a statistical sum. But now you also use another term that is not really clear to me: your current state Is this a state of my experience? My experience doesn't consist of discrete states, so I'm not clear on what this refers to. Is it only my *consciousness that counts as my state? Assuming computationalism, your conscious moment here and now can be represented as a computational state of a running program. That state can be reached by an infinity of computations. To predict your next moment from that, you have to take all this infinity of computations and apply on it a measure. The FPI occurs because you as you belongs to all this infinity, at the next step these infinity of computations diverge, somehow a measure must exists on that, which should correspond to the quantum measure to be in accord with QM/MWI. If you reject computationalism, then of course there is no state representing you here and now, if you don't reject it, then it exists at the correct substitution level by definition. Quentin Brent FPI means First Person Indeterminacy... so if it was not based on first person it would cleary not means anything... but as it is in its definition, you're just looking too far from what Bruno said. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 27 May 2013, at 19:10, meekerdb wrote: On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. FPI = First Person Indeterminacy. When you look at your body, or neighborhood, below your level of substitution what comp predicts you will see, is the trace of the infinitley many computations which go through your state. That's how the FPI makes this one resulting from a statistical sum. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. How does that then comport with everything happens, because it's NOT the case that everything happens here. Every possible subjective experience happens, , related to the many computations (in arithmetic) but with different relative probabilities. Comp makes the physical reality more solid, as it show it to rely on eternal statistics on atemporal number relations. Everything physical happens is really the p - BDp explained by the LUMs' theology, and it is more like shit happens, to be short. (I explain the math on the FOAR list if you are interested). Bruno Brent Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) It eliminates the person, in theory first, in camp, slavery, our gulag, after. It is a constant in human history, and it is what gives to religions (including materialist and atheist one) their bad reputation. Read La Mettrie and Sade to learn more on this. Bruno Brent It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6358 - Release Date: 05/25/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Bruno, With MWI are some universes less probable than others. I have difficulty understanding how a universe can be statistical. I think I understand the frequency argument. But that does not make sense either. Richard On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 May 2013, at 19:10, meekerdb wrote: On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. FPI = First Person Indeterminacy. When you look at your body, or neighborhood, below your level of substitution what comp predicts you will see, is the trace of the infinitley many computations which go through your state. That's how the FPI makes this one resulting from a statistical sum. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Yes. When done at the right level (if it exists). By definition, I would say. How does that then comport with everything happens, because it's NOT the case that everything happens here. Every possible subjective experience happens, , related to the many computations (in arithmetic) but with different relative probabilities. Comp makes the physical reality more solid, as it show it to rely on eternal statistics on atemporal number relations. Everything physical happens is really the p - BDp explained by the LUMs' theology, and it is more like shit happens, to be short. (I explain the math on the FOAR list if you are interested). Bruno Brent Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) It eliminates the person, in theory first, in camp, slavery, our gulag, after. It is a constant in human history, and it is what gives to religions (including materialist and atheist one) their bad reputation. Read La Mettrie and Sade to learn more on this. Bruno Brent It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6358 - Release Date: 05/25/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/27/2013 11:16 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/27/2013 10:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote: On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. Why? How so? If not, then I don't know what FPI means. I thought it referred to one's experience of being a person, but the is a unity to that experience. I experience being Brent Meeker. I don't experience being Bruno Marchal. Because it is a statistical sum on the infinity of computation going through *your current state*. But my question was what does a statistical sum mean? It doesn't help to explain that it is a statistical sum. But now you also use another term that is not really clear to me: your current state Is this a state of my experience? My experience doesn't consist of discrete states, so I'm not clear on what this refers to. Is it only my *consciousness that counts as my state? Assuming computationalism, your conscious moment here and now can be represented as a computational state of a running program. So only conscious thoughts contribute to me. The represented part I agree with, but Bruno seems to maintain that the computational state IS the conscious moment. But I could very well say yes to the doctor, to believe that a portion (or all) of my brain could be replaced by a functionally identical mechanism and still maintain my stream of consciousness, and yet not believe that a conscious thought it a state. In fact I think that if the functionally identical device was a digital one, it would have to go through many steps of computation to instantiate one conscious moment, i.e. one coherent thought or action. And it would have to interact with the world outside my skull in a way similar to my biological parts too (my brain is insensitive to 60Hz magnetic fields for example) if my consciousness were to be unchanged. Because it takes many computational steps to instantiate a conscious moment, conscious moments can overlap and this produces continuity and time. That state can be reached by an infinity of computations. To predict your next moment from that, you have to take all this infinity of computations and apply on it a measure. There's the rub. The FPI occurs because you as you belongs to all this infinity, at the next step these infinity of computations diverge, somehow a measure must exists on that, which should correspond to the quantum measure to be in accord with QM/MWI. But it seems that on the UD generation of computations, the semi-classical sequence of brain states relative to a given conscious moment would be of measure zero. In order to make the UD and QM measures comport, UD must incorporate decoherence, essentially it must recover stable matter. Brent If you reject computationalism, then of course there is no state representing you here and now, if you don't reject it, then it exists at the correct substitution level by definition. Quentin Brent FPI means First Person Indeterminacy... so if it was not based on first person it would cleary not means anything... but as it is in its definition, you're just looking too far from what Bruno said. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
In a way, professor, Marchal, you seem to be on the side of Stephen Wolfram, who once wrote about there being no need to ever do SETI, because, if we wanted to know advanced Extra Terrestrial technologies, it would be far, simpler to generate algorythems (sp) that contain these unknown civilizations. I tried to search and see if Dr. Wolfram eloborated on this strange, proposal, but seemingly, he did not. I am clueless, over what bit-stream one would run, and on what type of computer, we'd require to accomplish what Wolfram, once proposed. Perhaps Wolfram was just hand-waving, and merely exercising his imagination? Mitch -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, May 27, 2013 4:26 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 27 May 2013, at 05:05, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Understood, Jason. I became familiar with this digital universe concept, first, through Hans Moravec, in Mind Children. I wonder how possible it is to discover that we are part of an ancestor simulation? By reasoning, taking the FPI into consideration. We cannot discover this, but evaluate the probability, which might be high indeed. By the FPI, our consciousness relied on all computations (infinity) which is going through you state. In a sense, you are both in the simulations by ancestors (which exist in arithmetic) and all the other simulations, which exist also in arithmetic. Bruno -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, May 25, 2013 10:00 pm Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 5/25/2013 11:03 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM, lt;spudboy...@aol.comgt; wrote: Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person- thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. Mitch, Consider a few points: First, roughly 100 billion humans have ever lived in this history of humans, the life expectancy of humans over most of that time was 10 years, so roughly there have been 1 trillion years worth of human experience. Second, if transhumanism is correct and we transcend our biological limits we could not only live much longer but generate experiences at greatly accelerated rates. It would take the then current population of people (say it is 10 billion) only 100 years to generate the same total amount of experience of all humans going back millions of years. Even if only 10% of the population, spends only 1% of their time simulating/ experiencing alternate lives or histories, it would take a mere 100,000 years for most of human experiences to be generated artificially by our descendents. This ignores the acceleration that is possible. Electricity flows through wires about a million times faster than neurotransmitters conduct signals in the brain. This implies that without any miniaturization, human thought could be accelerated by about a factor of a million times, so it could take only a month (rather than 100,000 years) for these accelerated humans spending only 0.1% of their collective time simulating ancestors for the bulk of human experience to be artificially generated. Now consider that such a civilization could live for billions of years. If each post-human experiences a few thousand or a few million ancestor lives, or alternate species, etc., then odds quickly become overwhelming that your current moment of awareness is not explained by that of some biological being on a physical planet but that of
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 07:42:11PM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: In a way, professor, Marchal, you seem to be on the side of Stephen Wolfram, who once wrote about there being no need to ever do SETI, because, if we wanted to know advanced Extra Terrestrial technologies, it would be far, simpler to generate algorythems (sp) that contain these unknown civilizations. I tried to search and see if Dr. Wolfram eloborated on this strange, proposal, but seemingly, he did not. I am clueless, over what bit-stream one would run, and on what type of computer, we'd require to accomplish what Wolfram, once proposed. Perhaps Wolfram was just hand-waving, and merely exercising his imagination? Mitch That was pretty much the gist of his weighty tome A New Kind of Science. I must confess to not having read it - there's plenty to criticise in it, but also some valuable gems too, from accounts of people who have. I would disagree with Wolfram on this point. To search the space of computational algorithms (or cellular automata, being Wolfram's favourite computational multiverse) would have to be at least as hard, if not harder, than searching the physical space we live in. That is why I wouldn't abandon the Large Hadron Collider in favour of a Supercomputer costing the same amount of money. Anyway - check it out if you're interested. There's also plenty written about NKS - it was a rather controversial book, largely due to the lack of citations, and the somewhat megalomaniacal way that SW promoted it. Cheers -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote: Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. To which, one is tempted to respond: So what? If there is all this simulation going on, what reason is there to suppose it is being done by being anything like us or that the worlds in which the simulations take place (the real ones, if there are any) are anything like this one. Because the FPI makes this one a statistical sum on all possible one. What do you mean by a statiscal sum? FPI must still pick out some kind of unity; not just an average. You are simply led back to trying to discover what are possible worlds, where possible can be anything from familiar enough I can understand it to nomologically possible to not containing contradictions. Possible means livable from a first person point of view in such a way that you would not see the difference above the substitution level. So all simulations must look just like this?? Below the substitution level, everyone (humans, alien, numbers ..) see the same average on all computations, which, due to the constraints of self-reference and theoretical computer science is a well structured, highly complex, mathematical object. So what? So physics is reduced to arithmetic, or to machine theology... and this in a way which saves humans from reductionism. I didn't know reductionism endangered us. :-) Brent It makes also comp into science and out of philosophy. All this leads to a different, platonist and non aristotelian, view on reality. It makes Matter into a failed hypothesis (Matter =primitive matter). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6358 - Release Date: 05/25/13 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Understood, Jason. I became familiar with this digital universe concept, first, through Hans Moravec, in Mind Children. I wonder how possible it is to discover that we are part of an ancestor simulation? -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, May 25, 2013 10:00 pm Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 5/25/2013 11:03 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM, lt;spudboy...@aol.comgt; wrote: Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person-thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. Mitch, Consider a few points: First, roughly 100 billion humans have ever lived in this history of humans, the life expectancy of humans over most of that time was 10 years, so roughly there have been 1 trillion years worth of human experience. Second, if transhumanism is correct and we transcend our biological limits we could not only live much longer but generate experiences at greatly accelerated rates. It would take the then current population of people (say it is 10 billion) only 100 years to generate the same total amount of experience of all humans going back millions of years. Even if only 10% of the population, spends only 1% of their time simulating/experiencing alternate lives or histories, it would take a mere 100,000 years for most of human experiences to be generated artificially by our descendents. This ignores the acceleration that is possible. Electricity flows through wires about a million times faster than neurotransmitters conduct signals in the brain. This implies that without any miniaturization, human thought could be accelerated by about a factor of a million times, so it could take only a month (rather than 100,000 years) for these accelerated humans spending only 0.1% of their collective time simulating ancestors for the bulk of human experience to be artificially generated. Now consider that such a civilization could live for billions of years. If each post-human experiences a few thousand or a few million ancestor lives, or alternate species, etc., then odds quickly become overwhelming that your current moment of awareness is not explained by that of some biological being on a physical planet but that of some advanced being conducting a simulation on some advanced computational substrate. Jason -Mitch -Original Message- From: Jason Resch lt;jasonre...@gmail.comgt; To: Everything List lt;everything-list@googlegroups.comgt; Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, lt;spudboy...@aol.comgt; wrote: So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. If used for such purposes. Even if
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:05 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Understood, Jason. I became familiar with this digital universe concept, first, through Hans Moravec, in Mind Children. I wonder how possible it is to discover that we are part of an ancestor simulation? If computationalism is true then it is in principal impossible to rule out being in a simulation, so we could never disprove it. However, it may be possible to find strong evidence for our existence in a simulation. If the simulators wanted to reveal this fact to us they could make it pretty convincing. See http://lesswrong.com/lw/qk/that_alien_message/ for a nice story and example. Yet, I also think every conscious experience has an infinite number of explanations/incarnations, some fraction of which are due to simulations. So in a sense, we all already exist in a simulations (to varying degrees, as different entities might have a greater fraction of their explanations be simulations). Jason -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person-thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. Mitch, Consider a few points: First, roughly 100 billion humans have ever lived in this history of humans, the life expectancy of humans over most of that time was 10 years, so roughly there have been 1 trillion years worth of human experience. Second, if transhumanism is correct and we transcend our biological limits we could not only live much longer but generate experiences at greatly accelerated rates. It would take the then current population of people (say it is 10 billion) only 100 years to generate the same total amount of experience of all humans going back millions of years. Even if only 10% of the population, spends only 1% of their time simulating/experiencing alternate lives or histories, it would take a mere 100,000 years for most of human experiences to be generated artificially by our descendents. This ignores the acceleration that is possible. Electricity flows through wires about a million times faster than neurotransmitters conduct signals in the brain. This implies that without any miniaturization, human thought could be accelerated by about a factor of a million times, so it could take only a month (rather than 100,000 years) for these accelerated humans spending only 0.1% of their collective time simulating ancestors for the bulk of human experience to be artificially generated. Now consider that such a civilization could live for billions of years. If each post-human experiences a few thousand or a few million ancestor lives, or alternate species, etc., then odds quickly become overwhelming that your current moment of awareness is not explained by that of some biological being on a physical planet but that of some advanced being conducting a simulation on some advanced computational substrate. Jason -Mitch -Original Message- From: Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com To: Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: ** So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. If used for such purposes. Even if technology is not used for the explicit purpose of resurrection, say it is only used for exploration purposes, where simulation is applied to explore other possibilities of existence and being, a side effect will be to provide new paths for the consciousness of the simulated beings to follow. It is a bit like the guy who dreamed he was a butterfly. If it was an completely accurate dream (as simulation technology could allow), then the butterfly is given the ability to ressurect to become a human. Similarly, advanced omega point civilizations or Jupiter brains may choose to explore potentiality for consciousness and thus try to experience the lives of other beings. Such an intelligence, existing in any physical universe that provides infinite energy/infinite computing power has the ability to experience the life of every other being anywhere in any universe (assuming computationalism). If one of these exists anywhere, the it provides us the potential to wake up as it, just as the butterfly has the potential to wake up as a human. Such a being may even feel compelled to provide a pleasant afterlife given all the suffering that exists in the physical worlds, although this point is more contentious. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in impossible, and who am I to dispute them? But I still find the topic interesting, none the less. That is interesting to me. What is the website? My suspicion is that there is some feature of the universe that acts as a substrate for all actions and characteristics and records it all. I am trying to peg it down to the Planck length as
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/25/2013 11:03 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM, spudboy...@aol.com mailto:spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person-thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. Mitch, Consider a few points: First, roughly 100 billion humans have ever lived in this history of humans, the life expectancy of humans over most of that time was 10 years, so roughly there have been 1 trillion years worth of human experience. Second, if transhumanism is correct and we transcend our biological limits we could not only live much longer but generate experiences at greatly accelerated rates. It would take the then current population of people (say it is 10 billion) only 100 years to generate the same total amount of experience of all humans going back millions of years. Even if only 10% of the population, spends only 1% of their time simulating/experiencing alternate lives or histories, it would take a mere 100,000 years for most of human experiences to be generated artificially by our descendents. This ignores the acceleration that is possible. Electricity flows through wires about a million times faster than neurotransmitters conduct signals in the brain. This implies that without any miniaturization, human thought could be accelerated by about a factor of a million times, so it could take only a month (rather than 100,000 years) for these accelerated humans spending only 0.1% of their collective time simulating ancestors for the bulk of human experience to be artificially generated. Now consider that such a civilization could live for billions of years. If each post-human experiences a few thousand or a few million ancestor lives, or alternate species, etc., then odds quickly become overwhelming that your current moment of awareness is not explained by that of some biological being on a physical planet but that of some advanced being conducting a simulation on some advanced computational substrate. Jason -Mitch -Original Message- From: Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com To: Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com mailto:spudboy...@aol.com wrote: So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. If used for such purposes. Even if technology is not used for the explicit purpose of resurrection, say it is only used for exploration purposes, where simulation is applied to explore other possibilities of existence and being, a side effect will be to provide new paths for the consciousness of the simulated beings to follow. It is a bit like the guy who dreamed he was a butterfly. If it was an completely accurate dream (as simulation technology could allow), then the butterfly is given the ability to ressurect to become a human. Similarly, advanced omega point civilizations or Jupiter brains may choose to explore potentiality for consciousness and thus try to experience the lives of other beings. Such an intelligence, existing in any physical universe that provides infinite energy/infinite computing power has the ability to experience the life of every other being anywhere in any universe (assuming computationalism). If one of these exists anywhere, the it provides us the potential to wake up as it, just as the butterfly has the potential to wake up as a human. Such a being may even feel compelled to provide a pleasant afterlife given all the suffering that exists in the physical worlds, although this point is more contentious. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 5:20 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 12:51 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment But until you know it consciously, your mind state is the same in two parts of the multiverse, Why should mind=consciousness? Over any short duration I am conscious of *very* few things. I am hardly localized at all. Which is just another form of the white rabbit problem. On this world view, why should
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 4:31 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? See e.g. here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0102010 for the proof for eternal inflation models. That doesn't prove what you claimed. Garriga and Vilenkin argue that there are only finitely many distinct histories, say N. But in that case no possible history with probability less than 1/N can occur. Although N is very large, only very small fraction of histories permitted by conservation laws can occur. No, all the possible histories can occur, it's just that in a finite volume you only have a finite number of states. Saibal 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 4:31 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? See e.g. here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0102010 for the proof for eternal inflation models. That doesn't prove what you claimed. Garriga and Vilenkin argue that there are only finitely many distinct histories, say N. But in that case no possible history with probability less than 1/N can occur. Although N is very large, only very small fraction of histories permitted by conservation laws can occur. No, all the possible histories can occur, it's just that in a finite volume you only have a finite number of states. Saibal 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Brent's observation, that Vilenkin and Gaurriga's indicate that their eternal inflation (Guth and Linde too?) being limited, says that the MWI versions of our universe something like 10^90, or was it 10^150 in Vilenkin's Many World's ( book 2006, Vilenkin used both exponentials). That is a massive amount of limited, can we not agree? Some versions can be awfully close to ours with this amount. Mitch -Original Message- From: smitra smi...@zonnet.nl To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 8:32 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 4:31 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? See e.g. here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0102010 for the proof for eternal inflation models. That doesn't prove what you claimed. Garriga and Vilenkin argue that there are only finitely many distinct histories, say N. But in that case no possible history with probability less than 1/N can occur. Although N is very large, only very small fraction of histories permitted by conservation laws can occur. No, all the possible histories can occur, it's just that in a finite volume you only have a finite number of states. Saibal 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 24 May 2013, at 02:20, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 12:51 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be : On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment But until you know it consciously, your mind state is the same in two parts of the multiverse, Why should mind=consciousness? Over any short duration I am conscious of *very* few things. I am hardly localized at all. Which is just another form of the white rabbit problem. On this world view, why should expect any continuity in my experience
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 23 May 2013, at 01:37, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 05:15:45PM -0400, John Mikes wrote: Russell: if I may I inject some remarks ([?])into your post-text John M [?] Done on a LIVING person. Your NDE maye true, maybe not. [?] and what on earth has that to do with NDE? Did th experimentor revive the dead patient after the test and ask what she felt? It's all conjecture. [?] JM Relax, John. I'm using the term NDE in its conventional (loose) sense of an experience reported by someone who has recovered after cardiac arrest. That there is usually some oxygen deprivation in the brain would probably have something to do with the experience. At no stage would medical people say they've actually died (which is defined by brain death). I think the assumption is that if someone recovers after brain death is diagnosed, then the diagnosis must've been faulty. Or that he made a good backup, at the right comp level, and that comp is true, of course :) Bruno Cheers -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Saibal -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: ** So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. If used for such purposes. Even if technology is not used for the explicit purpose of resurrection, say it is only used for exploration purposes, where simulation is applied to explore other possibilities of existence and being, a side effect will be to provide new paths for the consciousness of the simulated beings to follow. It is a bit like the guy who dreamed he was a butterfly. If it was an completely accurate dream (as simulation technology could allow), then the butterfly is given the ability to ressurect to become a human. Similarly, advanced omega point civilizations or Jupiter brains may choose to explore potentiality for consciousness and thus try to experience the lives of other beings. Such an intelligence, existing in any physical universe that provides infinite energy/infinite computing power has the ability to experience the life of every other being anywhere in any universe (assuming computationalism). If one of these exists anywhere, the it provides us the potential to wake up as it, just as the butterfly has the potential to wake up as a human. Such a being may even feel compelled to provide a pleasant afterlife given all the suffering that exists in the physical worlds, although this point is more contentious. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in impossible, and who am I to dispute them? But I still find the topic interesting, none the less. That is interesting to me. What is the website? My suspicion is that there is some feature of the universe that acts as a substrate for all actions and characteristics and records it all. I am trying to peg it down to the Planck length as sort of a storage cell. The styllus to read-write could be anything from photons to neutrinos, that would write to the planck length. Who knows if it is even plausible, but I sort of like it anyway. I like NDE stuff too, and try to sort the most cogent stories from the least cogent. Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. Jason -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Interesting Jason, My issue with the multi-generated clones created either by the actions of a multiverse or the actions of hypercomputers, my concern is that, its such a waste (in my opinion) that a Jason who belongs to an identical Earth, but humans all have elephant tricks instead of noses. Or a Jason Resch, belonging to a species that has rectangular crystal panels built in their stomachs and backs (see thru). I am shooting for ridiculous incarnations of J. Resch, in order to illustrate the unlikeliness, of this method of producing the actual person-thoughts feelings memories. The memory thing as a blue print, to me, seems, essential, for resurrection. I could be totally wrong, but I am merely trying to simplify this for myself, if nobody else. Thanks, Jason. -Mitch -Original Message- From: Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com To: Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. If used for such purposes. Even if technology is not used for the explicit purpose of resurrection, say it is only used for exploration purposes, where simulation is applied to explore other possibilities of existence and being, a side effect will be to provide new paths for the consciousness of the simulated beings to follow. It is a bit like the guy who dreamed he was a butterfly. If it was an completely accurate dream (as simulation technology could allow), then the butterfly is given the ability to ressurect to become a human. Similarly, advanced omega point civilizations or Jupiter brains may choose to explore potentiality for consciousness and thus try to experience the lives of other beings. Such an intelligence, existing in any physical universe that provides infinite energy/infinite computing power has the ability to experience the life of every other being anywhere in any universe (assuming computationalism). If one of these exists anywhere, the it provides us the potential to wake up as it, just as the butterfly has the potential to wake up as a human. Such a being may even feel compelled to provide a pleasant afterlife given all the suffering that exists in the physical worlds, although this point is more contentious. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in impossible, and who am I to dispute them? But I still find the topic interesting, none the less. That is interesting to me. What is the website? My suspicion is that there is some feature of the universe that acts as a substrate for all actions and characteristics and records it all. I am trying to peg it down to the Planck length as sort of a storage cell. The styllus to read-write could be anything from photons to neutrinos, that would write to the planck length. Who knows if it is even plausible, but I sort of like it anyway. I like NDE stuff too, and try to sort the most cogent stories from the least cogent. Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely varied, we each reappear an infinite number of times. There are a countably infinite number of programs, and for any given level of complexity, there is a finite number of possible programs shorter than some length. Any consciousness we simulate is the consciousness of something that exists somewhere else in the infinitely varied/infinitely large universe, and if the universe is really this big, then someone else far away could simulate you perfectly without having to extract a record of you. Just running Bruno's UDA for a long enough time ressurects everyone, we are all contained in that short program. Jason -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Brent Saibal -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment about the fate of your ancestors and whether or not they felt pain. It can't be because the brain is in a superposition. Therefore the implication seems to be a kind of dualism. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment But until you know it consciously, your mind state is the same in two parts of the multiverse, the one where you ancestors did feel pain and the one where they didn't... how can you differentiate those two states ? How can the two outcomes not be correct continuations of that mind state before measurement ? Regards, Quentin about the fate of your ancestors and whether or not they felt pain. It can't be because the brain is in a superposition. Therefore the implication seems to be a kind of dualism. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/23/2013 12:51 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment But until you know it consciously, your mind state is the same in two parts of the multiverse, Why should mind=consciousness? Over any short duration I am conscious of *very* few things. I am hardly localized at all. Which is just another form of the white rabbit problem. On this world view, why should expect any continuity in my experience sufficient to define I? the one where you ancestors did feel pain and the one where they didn't... how can
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? See e.g. here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0102010 for the proof for eternal inflation models. But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Brent There is no collapse of the wavefunction, as also pointed out later in this thread by Quentin, it's just that you localize yourself in that sector where you have the reaction which you experience as pain. Saibal Saibal -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 12:51 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment But until you know it consciously, your mind state is the same in two parts of the multiverse, Why should mind=consciousness? Over any short duration I am conscious of *very* few things. I am hardly localized at all. Which is just another form of the white rabbit problem. On this world view, why should expect any continuity in my experience sufficient to define I? Your consciousness is
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/23/2013 5:20 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 12:51 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 11:27 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/23 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl mailto:smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? But then, the whole point I'm making is that the information in your brain that makes you feel something comes not out of thin air, but precisely due to evolution. So, you feeling pain comes about via ordinary down to earth quantum mechanics, which links this straightforwardly to the deaths of those creatures that by dying and not becoming your ancestors, gave rise to your ability to feel pain. Of course I agree that the gave rise to. But that's not the same supposing they were in a superposition with you up until the moment you felt a pain. That seems to reserve to consciousness the ability to collapse the wave function. Well if all universes still exists after the measurement, it just gives the ability for consciousness to localize itself... not collapsing anything which seems right. To collapse the wave function would mean that after self localisation, only one universe would remain. It does not seems that was what Saibal was implying. Regards, Quentin You're right, I put that badly. There are lots of things that localize themselves by making a classical record, and even an irretrievable one (c.f. buckyball double slit). So it seems wrong to suppose that consciousness is in a superposition when there is information in the environment But until you know it consciously, your mind state is the same in two parts of the multiverse, Why should mind=consciousness? Over any short duration I am conscious of *very* few things. I am hardly localized at all. Which is just another form of the white rabbit problem. On this world view, why should expect any continuity in my experience sufficient to define
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/23/2013 4:31 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net: On 5/23/2013 7:07 AM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be: On 23 May 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. I agree. Even in comp there are terrible restrictions on what comp states exist and how they are first person and third person related. Indeed that's why we can extract physics (and a whole theology) from numbers and + and *. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ It can be shown quite rigorously that everything that is not strictly forbidden by conservation laws, must happen in generic multiverse scenarios. Do you have a citation for that? And how do you know what conservation laws there are? See e.g. here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0102010 for the proof for eternal inflation models. That doesn't prove what you claimed. Garriga and Vilenkin argue that there are only finitely many distinct histories, say N. But in that case no possible history with probability less than 1/N can occur. Although N is very large, only very small fraction of histories permitted by conservation laws can occur. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
And HOW do you know all that? On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:13 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: If you feel pain then that feeling is directly related to the deaths of the creatures who didn't become your ancestors because of a lack of feeling for that same pain. So, you are actually experiencing the deaths of these creatures. Saibal Citeren John Mikes jami...@gmail.com: Russell and Richard: do you indeed MEAN those conditions recalled after crises as NEAR DEATH? Who knows what DEATH feels like? (- if it feels at all). Death is a-temporal in the sense we use it, also a-spatial, so nothing can be near it in either sense. The dissolution of the 'living' complexity (=death?) may not be an annihilation - it may be a reorganization of some of the ingredients (if we accept our image of those complexities). So partial components may 'live-on' in combination to other 'complexity' groups. That gives an un-limitable possibility to have contact (in some details?) with experiences/memories of deceased persons. (This is not a statement, just a hint how 'spiritistic' experiences may occur). On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- --**--** Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au --**--** -- 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 everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.**comeverything-list@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** group/everything-list?hl=enhttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_outhttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . -- 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 everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.**comeverything-list@googlegroups.com . Visit
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Russell: if I may I inject some remarks ([?])into your post-text John M On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.auwrote: My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. [?] Right, but has nothing to do with (experiencing?) death That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. [?] Done on a LIVING person. Your NDE maye true, maybe not. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. [?] ??? I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. [?] and what on earth has that to do with NDE? Did th experimentor revive the dead patient after the test and ask what she felt? It's all conjecture. [?] JM Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 814.gif
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. Saibal Citeren John Mikes jami...@gmail.com: And HOW do you know all that? On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:13 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: If you feel pain then that feeling is directly related to the deaths of the creatures who didn't become your ancestors because of a lack of feeling for that same pain. So, you are actually experiencing the deaths of these creatures. Saibal Citeren John Mikes jami...@gmail.com: Russell and Richard: do you indeed MEAN those conditions recalled after crises as NEAR DEATH? Who knows what DEATH feels like? (- if it feels at all). Death is a-temporal in the sense we use it, also a-spatial, so nothing can be near it in either sense. The dissolution of the 'living' complexity (=death?) may not be an annihilation - it may be a reorganization of some of the ingredients (if we accept our image of those complexities). So partial components may 'live-on' in combination to other 'complexity' groups. That gives an un-limitable possibility to have contact (in some details?) with experiences/memories of deceased persons. (This is not a statement, just a hint how 'spiritistic' experiences may occur). On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- --**--** Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au --**--** -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/22/2013 2:49 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Thought experiment: Suppose that someone has never experienced touching hot objects before. As long as this person does not find out that touching hot objects is painful, either by touching hot objects himself or by being told that it is painful, he will be in a superposition of two sectors of the multiverse where he has and has not the ability to feel extreme pain when touching very hot objects. The sector where he does not have the ability to feel pain has a very small amplitude, there evolution has run a different course. In the other sector evoluton has run the course where the ancestors in the first sector ddidn't survive, it where the creatures with some mutation that lead to them feeling pain when touching hot objects that survived here. The mere act of touching a hot object is a measuremnt which locates the person in the latter sector, only then does the outcome of the events that happened a long time ago become determined. That assumes that the same person exists up to the moment of measurement, differing, via FPI, only in the ability to feel pain. I doubt that is possible. There is a common assumption that QM makes anything possible, but it actually imposes some restrictions, although it's hard to say how they extend to the biology of macroscopic beings. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 05:15:45PM -0400, John Mikes wrote: Russell: if I may I inject some remarks ([?])into your post-text John M [?] Done on a LIVING person. Your NDE maye true, maybe not. [?] and what on earth has that to do with NDE? Did th experimentor revive the dead patient after the test and ask what she felt? It's all conjecture. [?] JM Relax, John. I'm using the term NDE in its conventional (loose) sense of an experience reported by someone who has recovered after cardiac arrest. That there is usually some oxygen deprivation in the brain would probably have something to do with the experience. At no stage would medical people say they've actually died (which is defined by brain death). I think the assumption is that if someone recovers after brain death is diagnosed, then the diagnosis must've been faulty. Cheers -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Russell and Richard: do you indeed MEAN those conditions recalled after crises as NEAR DEATH? Who knows what DEATH feels like? (- if it feels at all). Death is a-temporal in the sense we use it, also a-spatial, so nothing can be near it in either sense. The dissolution of the 'living' complexity (=death?) may not be an annihilation - it may be a reorganization of some of the ingredients (if we accept our image of those complexities). So partial components may 'live-on' in combination to other 'complexity' groups. That gives an un-limitable possibility to have contact (in some details?) with experiences/memories of deceased persons. (This is not a statement, just a hint how 'spiritistic' experiences may occur). On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.auwrote: My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Indeed I have had such an experience with a deceased person. Richard On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 4:14 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Russell and Richard: do you indeed MEAN those conditions recalled after crises as NEAR DEATH? Who knows what DEATH feels like? (- if it feels at all). Death is a-temporal in the sense we use it, also a-spatial, so nothing can be near it in either sense. The dissolution of the 'living' complexity (=death?) may not be an annihilation - it may be a reorganization of some of the ingredients (if we accept our image of those complexities). So partial components may 'live-on' in combination to other 'complexity' groups. That gives an un-limitable possibility to have contact (in some details?) with experiences/memories of deceased persons. (This is not a statement, just a hint how 'spiritistic' experiences may occur). On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.auwrote: My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
If you feel pain then that feeling is directly related to the deaths of the creatures who didn't become your ancestors because of a lack of feeling for that same pain. So, you are actually experiencing the deaths of these creatures. Saibal Citeren John Mikes jami...@gmail.com: Russell and Richard: do you indeed MEAN those conditions recalled after crises as NEAR DEATH? Who knows what DEATH feels like? (- if it feels at all). Death is a-temporal in the sense we use it, also a-spatial, so nothing can be near it in either sense. The dissolution of the 'living' complexity (=death?) may not be an annihilation - it may be a reorganization of some of the ingredients (if we accept our image of those complexities). So partial components may 'live-on' in combination to other 'complexity' groups. That gives an un-limitable possibility to have contact (in some details?) with experiences/memories of deceased persons. (This is not a statement, just a hint how 'spiritistic' experiences may occur). On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.auwrote: My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, May 19, 2013 7:59 pm Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... On 5/19/2013 3:41 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. Brent Yes, you could well be correct, all smoke and no fire, and this could be the truth. But after reading Parnia's book a couple of months ago, we could both be surprised. But if you say, well it just sounds too good to be true, I'd sadly aggree because thats how life often is. One is not encouraged by their latest press release, Jan 2013, ...The AWARE investigators have explained that owing to the exploratory nature of this study they do not anticipate there to be an end in the near future. Instead the study is likely to evolve into further research projects downstream with time. They are pleased to report the study is progressing well but have indicated that the results so far suggest more data and larger scale studies may be required... Which I read as,We didn't get what we wanted so we want to look more. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
My guess is that his primary concern is to develop the medical technology to resuscitate patients in critical conditions - ie by lowering the temperatue of the brain to prevent irreversible brain damage whilst allowing sufficient time for the heart damage to be repaired, etc. This is all a worthwhile aim of itself. That it also gives him the opportunity to perform some simple experimental tests of some of the more outrageous NDE claims, is simply icing on the cake. It's good that he has a sufficiently open mind to think of tests. I have heard (from somewhere unsubstantiated, no doubt), that the tests have turned up nothing startling, but whether it does or not, it's still interesting science. It reminds my of a scientific investigation I performed into the effects of pyramids on razor blade when I was at uni. Its the only time I've really dabbled with woo. I not only got a negative result (no significant difference between the treated blades, and controls), but interestingly, I found a potential explanation of the effect. Both control blades and treated blades lasted longer and were subjectively sharper than the blades I used before the experiment. If I hadn't done a controlled experiment, I would have concluded the effect to be real. I published the experiment in a local student magazine (it wasn't nearly rigourous enough for peer review), and the reaction I got from my colleagues was quite interesting - generally very supportive, as a matter of fact. I wonder if that would have been the case if I had found a positive result. Cheers On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:12:44AM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: You could be correct that Parnia's study is buried in double-talk. Usually if scientists reach a dead-end, during testing they abandon the thesis. If what he is doing, is little more, then looking for unicorns, then yes, its a dead end (pun?) and we will see in November. In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 18 May 2013, at 19:08, Johnathan Corgan wrote: On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 4:23 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 17 May 2013, at 22:52, Johnathan Corgan wrote: A common occurrence reported by users of Salvia Divinorum is that of having lived an entire alternate life in the few minutes of intoxication, and even being surprised and confused for a moment while the drug wears off that this is their real life and the one they remember was the drug induced one. Yes, that's quite a Maury effect, indeed. Utterly amazing and sometimes extremely confusing. This reminds me of the the Star Trek TNG episode The Inner Light, where Picard lives a third of a lifetime in 25 minutes under the control of a space artifact they encounter. The artifact was created by a doomed race as a way of preserving/propagating their culture, and implants the memory of having lived as a resident of their planet into Picard. (One of the few ST episodes to get away from the technobabble and explore some real science fiction themes.) Star Strek is cool. Salvia might be the Hubble of introspection. Just reading through the written experience reports on Erowid, it's amazing how completely different the subjective effects of Salvia are vs. more traditional psychedelic drugs. It's no wonder many of them end with I will never do this again. I tend to agree with you. My feeling is also that Salvia is rather quite different from the others, but I can't pretend to know so well all products. Salvia seems to me a *quite* amazing thing, with respect to, let us say, theological studies. I wonder what could be learned about how the mind works by studying these in a scientific, experimental setting. Dissociative in general are quite interesting. And salvia is highly selective in the dissociation, and seems to be very healthy and helpful, so such studies are needed, that's for sure. Unfortunately, at least in the United States, the legal standards for public scientific studies of drugs require them to be conducted in the context of assessing their efficacy as therapeutic agents. It is already clear that salvia has some efficacy as therapeutic agent, notably for diarrhea, nasal congestion, some type of migraine, addiction, obsession, depression, compulsive behavior, etc. It's unlikely that any protocol would be approved that was simply designed to study the effects described above. Yes, but it should not be difficult to make both studies at once, perhaps without saying. Especially that we can argue that therapeutic and spiritual might be related. It's also pretty unlikely to ever be able to do a double-blind experiment with Salvia. :) I can imagine some difficulties :) (That's a technical problem only, though). The world of pharmacologists try hard to not repeat the cannabis mistake. They will not present you this in this way, but there is apparently a real resistance by the pharmaceutical world to the illegality of salvia at the federal level in the US. There is a will of research based on an understanding of its importance due to its quite different and very selective biochemical action in the brain. That gives a bit of hope. It is also a nonsense to make it illegal, as most young people want no more hear about drugs after a salvia experience! I heard that some parents have put strong salvia in cannabis bag, in their home, to fail their children and disgust them of all drugs! (added: to make any drug illegal is a nonsense, actually, especially the most dangerous one). The cosmic joke asks for a small but non null amount of spiritual maturity, to put it in that way. Well, that something the plant taught me apparently. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 18 May 2013, at 13:31, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Why people do not include the original link in their mails is something I can not understand This is the article where the text was extracted: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/?p=155740 The most interesting thing is at the end: It reports a pacient resucitated after 40 minutes from a cooling state: Parnia: I wasn’t involved in his care when he arrived at the hospital, but I know his doctors well. We’d been working with the emergency room to make sure they knew the importance of starting to cool people down. When Tiralosi arrived, they cooled him, which helped preserve his brain cells. They found vessels blocked in his heart. That’s now treatable. By doing CPR and cooling him down, the doctors managed to fix him and ensure that he didn’t have brain damage. When Tiralosi woke up, he told nurses that he had a profound experience and wanted to talk about it. That’s how we met. He told me that he felt incredibly peaceful, and saw this perfect being, full of love and compassion. This is not uncommon. People tend to interpret what they see based on their background: A Hindu describes a Hindu god, an atheist doesn’t see a Hindu god or a Christian god, but some being. Different cultures see the same thing, but their interpretation depends on what they believe. The last paragraph is in accordance with what I predict from my natural selection-based hypothesis (expressed a few threads before). http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list@googlegroups.com/msg37408.html Either if this is a genuine return of the soul to the body or not, what is undisputable is the existence of the phenomenon and for me, there is clear the coherence between what traditional religious wishdom say and the evolutionary hypotheses. My standpoint is 1)We don not know, Good :) 2) traditional wishdom know something that we do not know. I am not sure of that. One guy see the point, perhaps, and the disciples repeat without personal understanding, and the tradition can betray completely the original message. Of course some good tradition can exist, but they will not transmit any messages, but a set of techniques for helping the people to get the personal understanding and/or illumination. But even here, some tradition can transform itself into a bunch of superstitions, confusing the technique as a mean with the technique as a goal. Traditional wisdom can be beneficial, but it is always near traditional bullshit, if I may say. 3) Even if you think that traditional wishdom don´t know exactly what happens, we should learn from it. This I agree, if only this can be done with a critical mind. All questions should be permitted, and all doubts should be heard, on any point. 4)To reject the latter is a betrayal of scientific enquiry. Absolutely. The knowledge of the past is not the result of what a bunch of idiots have said until we, the Illuminated arrived, but the result of deep discussions and confrontations of ideas, experiences and worldviews. OK. Bruno 2013/5/17 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net Hi Art Funkhouser The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases suggests to me at least that the mind does not need the brain to function. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences Dr. Roger Clough NIST (ret.) 5/17/2013 See my Leibniz site at http://team.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Art Funkhouser Receiver: undisclosed-recipients: Time: 2013-05-16, 09:33:59 Subject: [Mind and Brain] Consciousness after Death: Strange Tales From theFrontiers of Resuscitation Medicine Consciousness after Death: Strange Tales From the Frontiers of Resuscitation Medicine -- (Wired -- April 24, 2013) Sam Parnia practices resuscitation medicine. In other words, he helps bring people back from the dead --- and some return with stories. Their tales could help save lives, and even challenge traditional scientific ideas about the nature of consciousness. The evidence we have so far is that human consciousness does not become annihilated, said Parnia, a doctor at Stony Brook University Hospital and director of the school's resuscitation research program. It continues for a few hours after death, albeit in a hibernated state we cannot see from the outside. Resuscitation medicine grew out of the mid-twentieth century discovery of CPR, the medical procedure by which hearts that have stopped beating are revived. Originally effective for a few minutes after cardiac arrest, advances in CPR have pushed that time to a half-hour or more. New techniques promise to even further extend the boundary between life and death. At the same time, experiences reported by resuscitated people sometimes defy what's thought to be possible. They claim to have
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On Fri, May 17, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death [...] Huh? If its after death then they are not nearly dead they are completely dead. The fact that sometimes the brain generates hallucinations when it is seriously deprived of oxygen has few philosophical implications. It's the near part that makes this a bore, but if somebody were dead and buried for 20 years and then came back and told us all what it was like, well..., that would be interesting. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences It's odd that, although it should be easy to show if it exists, it has never been conclusively demonstrated that while out of the body anybody has gained any information about anything that they did not already have when they were in their body. John K Clark -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
In a message dated 5/17/2013 6:02:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, li...@hpcoders.com.au writes: Where's your evidence of this happening? You're not just claiming that people have been resuscitated from a brain dead state, but that they are conscious as well. Reliable evidence of this would be big news indeed! From what I understand, Professor, this has been documented by physicians in a few situations. We shall see nore (hopefully) this November, when the AWARE study by Sam Parnia, gets announced. He is a leader in resuscitation technology applied to emergeny medicine, and advocates strongly, the use of chilling the tissues, including the brain or course is Parnia's focus. Will this report be more smoke than fire, I am not extremly optimistic. Will the particiants in his study evince no brainwaves apparent, I am not hopeful, but I think this would meet your criteria. What the study does incurr in the AWARE study, is the method of planting messages in emergency rooms in obscure places, to see if the patient is able to detect the message? If some do, then there are two options. One is chicanery on the part of the hospital stuff, or Parnia, informing the patient or his family about this 'test.' The second possibility, is that everyone is true to their word, and people somehow develop a sort of second sight, during moments of physical damage or stress. If there is no cheating and we get positive results, then we have our choice in what to believe? Big Foot, or UFO? As I mentioned, Parnia's study seems too good to be true, but let him present the evidence. If his evidence is repeatable, then the world is a different place then we thought. Mitch -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/19/2013 3:06 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: What the study does incurr in the AWARE study, is the method of planting messages in emergency rooms in obscure places, to see if the patient is able to detect the message? If some do, then there are two options. One is chicanery on the part of the hospital stuff, or Parnia, informing the patient or his family about this 'test.' The second possibility, is that everyone is true to their word, and people somehow develop a sort of second sight, during moments of physical damage or stress. If there is no cheating and we get positive results, then we have our choice in what to believe? Big Foot, or UFO? As I mentioned, Parnia's study seems too good to be true, but let him present the evidence. If his evidence is repeatable, then the world is a different place then we thought. Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
In a message dated 5/19/2013 1:36:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, johnkcl...@gmail.com writes: It's odd that, although it should be easy to show if it exists, it has never been conclusively demonstrated that while out of the body anybody has gained any information about anything that they did not already have when they were in their body. John K Clark John depending on how determined a conspiracy is, and it is possible, that some physicians and patients, and their families collaborate, lets review your phrase, conclusively demonstrated. What are your parameters for being 'conclusively demonstrated,' as a scientific-medical endevor? What would make something conclusive for you? The reason I ask, is because you stated an interesting statement, and I got to wondering how one could conclusively proven? You are aware that there have been curious incidents reported where the patient appeared to know stuff they would be unlikely know. Such as where one's dentures were placed while the patient was unconscious, or a single tennis shoe on a hospital rooftop, or the names of electro-cardiac-heat lung machines on ID plates, that were spelled in German. Could it all be a conspiracy? Yeah. Then I ask how likely is such a conspiracy to be carried out? Now, I don't know. So, if you can set criteria, for what is conclusively demonstrated, this could be useful. Now, taking the role of a not so skeptical, I wonder how theories in physics get rejected as much as NDE stuff does? Like what is our conclusive proof for bosonic string theory, or M-brane theory, or Everetts MWI (I like this because it sounds wonderful) or Loop Quantum Gravity? Perhaps, its just tougher to test for, then theories of physics, where as, goofing with people at end of life, or in an emergency room, sounds like the researcher might run the risk of arrest, and I don't mean, cardiac, either. Mitch -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. Brent Yes, you could well be correct, all smoke and no fire, and this could be the truth. But after reading Parnia's book a couple of months ago, we could both be surprised. But if you say, well it just sounds too good to be true, I'd sadly aggree because thats how life often is. Mitch -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
On 5/19/2013 3:41 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 5/19/2013 6:19:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, meeke...@verizon.net writes: Since the study has been going on five years, and there has been no leak of a positive result, I expect that there are no positive results to report. I find it hard to imagine that an amazing positive result, that would be known to several members of a medical team, could be kept secret. Brent Yes, you could well be correct, all smoke and no fire, and this could be the truth. But after reading Parnia's book a couple of months ago, we could both be surprised. But if you say, well it just sounds too good to be true, I'd sadly aggree because thats how life often is. One is not encouraged by their latest press release, Jan 2013, ...The AWARE investigators have explained that owing to the exploratory nature of this study they do not anticipate there to be an end in the near future. Instead the study is likely to evolve into further research projects downstream with time. They are pleased to report the study is progressing well but have indicated that the results so far suggest more data and larger scale studies may be required... Which I read as,We didn't get what we wanted so we want to look more. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 17 May 2013, at 17:33, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/5/17 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 17 May 2013, at 12:07, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:39:50AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Art Funkhouser The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases suggests to me at least that the mind does not need the brain to function. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences Where's your evidence of this happening? You're not just claiming that people have been resuscitated from a brain dead state, but that they are conscious as well. Reliable evidence of this would be big news indeed! It is very hard to assess scientifically presence, or absence, of consciousness, notably of person in highly comatose state. One reason for this is the Maury Effect ((as I call it in conscience et mécanisme) . You have perhaps heard about Maury's theory of dream. Maury, like Malcolm, pretended that we are unconscious the whole night, including during dream episodes. In fact Maury argued that dreams do not exist, and that a dream is a construction done at the moment of awakening. This has been rather properly refuted with the use of lucid dreams and Electro Encephalo- measurements (Hearne, Laberge, Dement, ...(You can find the references in the bibliography of conscience et Mécanism(*)). Yet, in dream, the brain, like a talented novelist can create in a short laps of time an imaginary past, similar to what Maury thought the entire dream is. In fact it is hard to imagine how a dream can begun without creating a situation and a memory configuration for that situation. This does not explain all aspect of a NDE, but can invalidate too quick deduction, especially that the recovering from coma is a slow process, where the brain get more active in some incremental way, and during that time a Maury effect would be the easier explanation for the apparent feeling of having live something during the time of the comma. Note that a digital reconstitution can also be seen as some Maury effect. The reconstitution creates a long-life-past memory. Other more impressive reports exist, where people, after a coma, can describe happenings in the room or in the hospital when they were in the comatose state. But does it exist such report about person in brain dead state that somehow awaken/revive from that state ? I don't think that exists. Jesus perhaps? (well the evidences are poor, 'course). Well, I don't think that exist. Near death does not mean death. The notion of brain dead' is dependent on technology, and some people can get out state which would have been considered dead sometimes ago, but of course this means they were not dead, I would say by definition. But here I was alluding to the physicians describing patient in coma state, when capable of describing some unusual device used during their comma. But as I said, this is poor evidences too, and systematic study of this is difficult. The field is also tarnished by some amount of wishful thinking, making hard the evaluation of testimony. But NDE are a very interesting field of study, and statistics confirms some facts, like the life-changing benefits by people pretending having gone through one. Best, Bruno Regards, Quentin This is far more impressive, but unfortunately, although amazingly many physicians reports such facts, it is hard to assess them, or repeat them, as it is obvious we can't put a human Guinea Pig in such state, which are really near death, and that would be unethical to try. For each particular case, loopholes exist in the account. More case studies are needed, with some progress in anesthesiology. Are NDE contradicting mainstream science? It seems to me that mainstream science, by its current Aristotelianism is already contradicted itself by ideas like COMP or STRONG-AI. Does NDE assess the comp platonism? Comp predicts a large range of after-life experiences. Comp predicts also what can be memorized from them, what can be told, and what cannot be memorized at all. It is here that the salvia reports seem to me very amazing, as it looks people can memorize more than what comp would allowed, unless our subst-level appears to be *very* more low than neurons (perhaps). Well, given that we might be seriously wrong with the mind-matter connection since Aristotle, we can be sure only of one thing: much more work has to be done on this subject, and this, if possible, in a very large open frame of mind, far from religious or anti- religious prejudices. Use of different narcotics should be encouraged, but we are a long way from that too. Salvia and DMT seem to have NDE like effects, and seem to be non toxic, and non dangerous when done with a minimum amount of responsibility. Bruno (*) http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/bxlthesis/
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 17 May 2013, at 22:52, Johnathan Corgan wrote: On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Salvia and DMT seem to have NDE like effects A common occurrence reported by users of Salvia Divinorum is that of having lived an entire alternate life in the few minutes of intoxication, and even being surprised and confused for a moment while the drug wears off that this is their real life and the one they remember was the drug induced one. Yes, that's quite a Maury effect, indeed. Utterly amazing and sometimes extremely confusing. People who like the feeling of being in control can dislike it a lot. Salvia is not to kind with people taking high dose and then resisting. Perhaps something akin the Maury Effect is happening, where the *memory* of having lived an entire alternate life is somehow created within the mind as result of the drug effect, which would then be 1p indistinguishable from actually having happened. I think so. But since I experiment with salvia, I have realized, during the night, that with the slow (non rem) sleep, there can be cascades of such Maury effects. For a second, you remember another life, then the second after another one, and then another one, but without some concentration, you forget them all very quickly. There might be a sort of unconscious decision process for the theme of the next (rem) dream, I dunno. Salvia seems to have an uniquely dramatic effect on the mind's subjective experience of episodic and semantic memory, identity, body image, time duration, and consciousness. Salvia might be the Hubble of introspection. It provides a lot of data, most of them quite *surprising*. It is of course hard to interpret the experience, notably for the afterlife effect, but from many reports it seems to have a verifiable cure of the fear of death effect, at least for some period. It seems it can cure many obsessions in general, and it seems it can be used to quit drugs, a bit like iboga, but in more than one session (unlike iboga). It is a quite magical plant. I knock my head on the wall to figure out how some aspect of such an experience is just possible or memorizable (like the out-of-time consciousness). Even considered as an hallucination, it remains seemingly something impossible to experience. But salvia is quite gifted to teach that seeming is deceiving. It might confirms some comp weirdness though. I wonder what could be learned about how the mind works by studying these in a scientific, experimental setting. Dissociative in general are quite interesting. And salvia is highly selective in the dissociation, and seems to be very healthy and helpful, so such studies are needed, that's for sure. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
Why people do not include the original link in their mails is something I can not understand This is the article where the text was extracted: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/?p=155740 The most interesting thing is at the end: It reports a pacient resucitated after 40 minutes from a cooling state: *Parnia:* I wasn’t involved in his care when he arrived at the hospital, but I know his doctors well. We’d been working with the emergency room to make sure they knew the importance of starting to cool people down. When Tiralosi arrived, they cooled him, which helped preserve his brain cells. They found vessels blocked in his heart. That’s now treatable. By doing CPR and cooling him down, the doctors managed to fix him and ensure that he didn’t have brain damage. When Tiralosi woke up, he told nurses that he had a profound experience and wanted to talk about it. That’s how we met. He told me that he felt incredibly peaceful, and saw this perfect being, full of love and compassion. This is not uncommon. *People tend to interpret what they see based on their background: A Hindu describes a Hindu god, an atheist doesn’t see a Hindu god or a Christian god, but some being. Different cultures see the same thing, but their interpretation depends on what they believe.* The last paragraph is in accordance with what I predict from my natural selection-based hypothesis (expressed a few threads before). http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list@googlegroups.com/msg37408.html Either if this is a genuine return of the soul to the body or not, what is undisputable is the existence of the phenomenon and for me, there is clear the coherence between what traditional religious wishdom say and the evolutionary hypotheses. My standpoint is 1)We don not know, 2) traditional wishdom know something that we do not know. 3) Even if you think that traditional wishdom don´t know exactly what happens, we should learn from it. 4)To reject the latter is a betrayal of scientific enquiry. The knowledge of the past is not the result of what a bunch of idiots have said until we, the Illuminated arrived, but the result of deep discussions and confrontations of ideas, experiences and worldviews. 2013/5/17 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net Hi Art Funkhouser The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases suggests to me at least that the mind does not need the brain to function. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences Dr. Roger Clough NIST (ret.) 5/17/2013 See my Leibniz site at http://team.academia.edu/RogerClough - Receiving the following content - From: Art Funkhouser Receiver: undisclosed-recipients: Time: 2013-05-16, 09:33:59 Subject: [Mind and Brain] Consciousness after Death: Strange Tales From theFrontiers of Resuscitation Medicine Consciousness after Death: Strange Tales From the Frontiers of Resuscitation Medicine -- (Wired -- April 24, 2013) Sam Parnia practices resuscitation medicine. In other words, he helps bring people back from the dead --- and some return with stories. Their tales could help save lives, and even challenge traditional scientific ideas about the nature of consciousness. The evidence we have so far is that human consciousness does not become annihilated, said Parnia, a doctor at Stony Brook University Hospital and director of the school's resuscitation research program. It continues for a few hours after death, albeit in a hibernated state we cannot see from the outside. Resuscitation medicine grew out of the mid-twentieth century discovery of CPR, the medical procedure by which hearts that have stopped beating are revived. Originally effective for a few minutes after cardiac arrest, advances in CPR have pushed that time to a half-hour or more. New techniques promise to even further extend the boundary between life and death. At the same time, experiences reported by resuscitated people sometimes defy what's thought to be possible. They claim to have seen and heard things, though activity in their brains appears to have stopped. It sounds supernatural, and if their memories are accurate and their brains really have stopped, it's neurologically inexplicable, at least with what's now known. Parnia, leader of the Human Consciousness Project's AWARE study, which documents after-death experiences in 25 hospitals across North America and Europe, is studying the phenomenon scientifically. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. --
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Hello, Good point, but it depends on your level of expectation. If you demand a 5-star hotel, even though, all that can be afforded is a 3-star, then we have to do the best we can with what we've got, perhaps until things get better? But most people do ok with three-star, come to think of it. Also, the future may be somehow better. Maybe? Mitch -Original Message- From: Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, May 17, 2013 8:31 pm Subject: Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ... Who would want to be resurrected into this hell hole? clementine On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in impossible, and who am I to dispute them? But I still find the topic interesting, none the less. My suspicion is that there is some feature of the universe that acts as a substrate for all actions and characteristics and records it all. I am trying to peg it down to the Planck length as sort of a storage cell. The styllus to read-write could be anything from photons to neutrinos, that would write to the planck length. Who knows if it is even plausible, but I sort of like it anyway. I like NDE stuff too, and try to sort the most cogent stories from the least cogent. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 4:23 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 17 May 2013, at 22:52, Johnathan Corgan wrote: A common occurrence reported by users of Salvia Divinorum is that of having lived an entire alternate life in the few minutes of intoxication, and even being surprised and confused for a moment while the drug wears off that this is their real life and the one they remember was the drug induced one. Yes, that's quite a Maury effect, indeed. Utterly amazing and sometimes extremely confusing. This reminds me of the the Star Trek TNG episode The Inner Light, where Picard lives a third of a lifetime in 25 minutes under the control of a space artifact they encounter. The artifact was created by a doomed race as a way of preserving/propagating their culture, and implants the memory of having lived as a resident of their planet into Picard. (One of the few ST episodes to get away from the technobabble and explore some real science fiction themes.) Salvia might be the Hubble of introspection. Just reading through the written experience reports on Erowid, it's amazing how completely different the subjective effects of Salvia are vs. more traditional psychedelic drugs. It's no wonder many of them end with I will never do this again. I wonder what could be learned about how the mind works by studying these in a scientific, experimental setting. Dissociative in general are quite interesting. And salvia is highly selective in the dissociation, and seems to be very healthy and helpful, so such studies are needed, that's for sure. Unfortunately, at least in the United States, the legal standards for public scientific studies of drugs require them to be conducted in the context of assessing their efficacy as therapeutic agents. It's unlikely that any protocol would be approved that was simply designed to study the effects described above. It's also pretty unlikely to ever be able to do a double-blind experiment with Salvia. :) Johnathan -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 5/18/2013 4:31 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: traditional wishdom A freudian typo? 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
A typo like many others In my side ;) What is embarrassing for me is that I´m incapable to see them even if I check the writing. I beg your pardon. 2013/5/18 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 5/18/2013 4:31 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: traditional wishdom A freudian typo? 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 5/18/2013 12:33 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: A typo like many others In my side ;) What is embarrassing for me is that I´m incapable to see them even if I check the writing. I beg your pardon. No need for pardon. I think it's an excellent neologism with broad application. wishdom: n. the attribute of appearing wise by validating wishful thinking. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:39:50AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Art Funkhouser The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases suggests to me at least that the mind does not need the brain to function. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences Where's your evidence of this happening? You're not just claiming that people have been resuscitated from a brain dead state, but that they are conscious as well. Reliable evidence of this would be big news indeed! -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 17 May 2013, at 12:07, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:39:50AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Art Funkhouser The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases suggests to me at least that the mind does not need the brain to function. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences Where's your evidence of this happening? You're not just claiming that people have been resuscitated from a brain dead state, but that they are conscious as well. Reliable evidence of this would be big news indeed! It is very hard to assess scientifically presence, or absence, of consciousness, notably of person in highly comatose state. One reason for this is the Maury Effect ((as I call it in conscience et mécanisme) . You have perhaps heard about Maury's theory of dream. Maury, like Malcolm, pretended that we are unconscious the whole night, including during dream episodes. In fact Maury argued that dreams do not exist, and that a dream is a construction done at the moment of awakening. This has been rather properly refuted with the use of lucid dreams and Electro Encephalo-measurements (Hearne, Laberge, Dement, ...(You can find the references in the bibliography of conscience et Mécanism(*)). Yet, in dream, the brain, like a talented novelist can create in a short laps of time an imaginary past, similar to what Maury thought the entire dream is. In fact it is hard to imagine how a dream can begun without creating a situation and a memory configuration for that situation. This does not explain all aspect of a NDE, but can invalidate too quick deduction, especially that the recovering from coma is a slow process, where the brain get more active in some incremental way, and during that time a Maury effect would be the easier explanation for the apparent feeling of having live something during the time of the comma. Note that a digital reconstitution can also be seen as some Maury effect. The reconstitution creates a long-life-past memory. Other more impressive reports exist, where people, after a coma, can describe happenings in the room or in the hospital when they were in the comatose state. This is far more impressive, but unfortunately, although amazingly many physicians reports such facts, it is hard to assess them, or repeat them, as it is obvious we can't put a human Guinea Pig in such state, which are really near death, and that would be unethical to try. For each particular case, loopholes exist in the account. More case studies are needed, with some progress in anesthesiology. Are NDE contradicting mainstream science? It seems to me that mainstream science, by its current Aristotelianism is already contradicted itself by ideas like COMP or STRONG-AI. Does NDE assess the comp platonism? Comp predicts a large range of after-life experiences. Comp predicts also what can be memorized from them, what can be told, and what cannot be memorized at all. It is here that the salvia reports seem to me very amazing, as it looks people can memorize more than what comp would allowed, unless our subst-level appears to be *very* more low than neurons (perhaps). Well, given that we might be seriously wrong with the mind-matter connection since Aristotle, we can be sure only of one thing: much more work has to be done on this subject, and this, if possible, in a very large open frame of mind, far from religious or anti-religious prejudices. Use of different narcotics should be encouraged, but we are a long way from that too. Salvia and DMT seem to have NDE like effects, and seem to be non toxic, and non dangerous when done with a minimum amount of responsibility. Bruno (*) http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/bxlthesis/consciencemecanisme.html -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
2013/5/17 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 17 May 2013, at 12:07, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:39:50AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Art Funkhouser The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases suggests to me at least that the mind does not need the brain to function. This is also suggested by out of the body experiences Where's your evidence of this happening? You're not just claiming that people have been resuscitated from a brain dead state, but that they are conscious as well. Reliable evidence of this would be big news indeed! It is very hard to assess scientifically presence, or absence, of consciousness, notably of person in highly comatose state. One reason for this is the Maury Effect ((as I call it in conscience et mécanisme) . You have perhaps heard about Maury's theory of dream. Maury, like Malcolm, pretended that we are unconscious the whole night, including during dream episodes. In fact Maury argued that dreams do not exist, and that a dream is a construction done at the moment of awakening. This has been rather properly refuted with the use of lucid dreams and Electro Encephalo-measurements (Hearne, Laberge, Dement, ...(You can find the references in the bibliography of conscience et Mécanism(*)). Yet, in dream, the brain, like a talented novelist can create in a short laps of time an imaginary past, similar to what Maury thought the entire dream is. In fact it is hard to imagine how a dream can begun without creating a situation and a memory configuration for that situation. This does not explain all aspect of a NDE, but can invalidate too quick deduction, especially that the recovering from coma is a slow process, where the brain get more active in some incremental way, and during that time a Maury effect would be the easier explanation for the apparent feeling of having live something during the time of the comma. Note that a digital reconstitution can also be seen as some Maury effect. The reconstitution creates a long-life-past memory. Other more impressive reports exist, where people, after a coma, can describe happenings in the room or in the hospital when they were in the comatose state. But does it exist such report about person in brain dead state that somehow awaken/revive from that state ? I don't think that exists. Regards, Quentin This is far more impressive, but unfortunately, although amazingly many physicians reports such facts, it is hard to assess them, or repeat them, as it is obvious we can't put a human Guinea Pig in such state, which are really near death, and that would be unethical to try. For each particular case, loopholes exist in the account. More case studies are needed, with some progress in anesthesiology. Are NDE contradicting mainstream science? It seems to me that mainstream science, by its current Aristotelianism is already contradicted itself by ideas like COMP or STRONG-AI. Does NDE assess the comp platonism? Comp predicts a large range of after-life experiences. Comp predicts also what can be memorized from them, what can be told, and what cannot be memorized at all. It is here that the salvia reports seem to me very amazing, as it looks people can memorize more than what comp would allowed, unless our subst-level appears to be *very* more low than neurons (perhaps). Well, given that we might be seriously wrong with the mind-matter connection since Aristotle, we can be sure only of one thing: much more work has to be done on this subject, and this, if possible, in a very large open frame of mind, far from religious or anti-religious prejudices. Use of different narcotics should be encouraged, but we are a long way from that too. Salvia and DMT seem to have NDE like effects, and seem to be non toxic, and non dangerous when done with a minimum amount of responsibility. Bruno (*) http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/bxlthesis/** consciencemecanisme.htmlhttp://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/bxlthesis/consciencemecanisme.html -- --**--** Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au --**--** -- 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 everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.**comeverything-list@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On 5/17/2013 2:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases There are no such documented facts. First, EKG's used to monitor brain activity cannot detect neural activity deep in the brain. Second, near death is not death. Even a strictly materialist model would say brain activity might cease and start up again. NDE reports of meeting dead people and heaven are impossible to correlate in time with brain events and may well occur when the brain is recovering normal activity. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:03 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 5/17/2013 2:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: The documented fact that people have had near death experiences after death, after electrical activity in the brain ceases There are no such documented facts. First, EKG's used to monitor brain activity cannot detect neural activity deep in the brain. Second, near death is not death. Even a strictly materialist model would say brain activity might cease and start up again. I would say that where the dividing line between alive and dead falls is a matter of our technological capability. There is no definite line. Jason -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its independence
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Salvia and DMT seem to have NDE like effects A common occurrence reported by users of Salvia Divinorum is that of having lived an entire alternate life in the few minutes of intoxication, and even being surprised and confused for a moment while the drug wears off that this is their real life and the one they remember was the drug induced one. Perhaps something akin the Maury Effect is happening, where the *memory* of having lived an entire alternate life is somehow created within the mind as result of the drug effect, which would then be 1p indistinguishable from actually having happened. Salvia seems to have an uniquely dramatic effect on the mind's subjective experience of episodic and semantic memory, identity, body image, time duration, and consciousness. I wonder what could be learned about how the mind works by studying these in a scientific, experimental setting. Johnathan -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in impossible, and who am I to dispute them? But I still find the topic interesting, none the less. My suspicion is that there is some feature of the universe that acts as a substrate for all actions and characteristics and records it all. I am trying to peg it down to the Planck length as sort of a storage cell. The styllus to read-write could be anything from photons to neutrinos, that would write to the planck length. Who knows if it is even plausible, but I sort of like it anyway. I like NDE stuff too, and try to sort the most cogent stories from the least cogent. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: That the mind works even after the brain ceases to function suggests its ...
Who would want to be resurrected into this hell hole? clementine On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: ** So, Jason,by this reasoning, a sufficiently advanced technology, then, in indistinguisable from Resurrection. I mention this because I have discussed tech resurrection, as, at least, an intellectual phenomenon, over at the Kurzweil forum. There is an enthusiast for technologically based resurrection, on the forum, has produced a moderately, large, website, that presents this concept. Most people will say this in impossible, and who am I to dispute them? But I still find the topic interesting, none the less. My suspicion is that there is some feature of the universe that acts as a substrate for all actions and characteristics and records it all. I am trying to peg it down to the Planck length as sort of a storage cell. The styllus to read-write could be anything from photons to neutrinos, that would write to the planck length. Who knows if it is even plausible, but I sort of like it anyway. I like NDE stuff too, and try to sort the most cogent stories from the least cogent. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
