### Re: KIM 2.3 (was Re: Time)

Le 11-janv.-09, à 17:55, Brent Meeker a écrit : Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 2009/1/11 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com: I'm suggesting that running a state is incoherent. A machine running a program goes through a sequence of states. Consider 20 consecutive states, s1 to s20, which

### Re: KIM 2.3 (was Re: Time)

2009/1/12 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com: A machine running a program goes through a sequence of states. Consider 20 consecutive states, s1 to s20, which give rise to several moments of consciousness. Would you say that running the sequence s1 to s20 on a single machine m1 will give a

### Re: Exact Theology was:Re: Kim 2.4 - 2.5

Ah bravo Günther, now I am depressing :( I don't succeed in finding my Steinhart book. I don't either find the book on the net, and I begin to doubt it is a book by the same Steinhart. I have some doubt that my Steinhart has Eric as first name. I remember only that the book was taking

### Re: Exact Theology was:Re: Kim 2.4 - 2.5

Bruno, sorry for taking it jokingly (ref: Steinhart): Latest research revealed that Shakespeare's oeuvre was not written by William Shakespeare, but by quite another man named William Shakespeare. John From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To:

### Re: MGA 2

Hello Bruno, I think you are correct, but allowing the observer to be mechanically described as obeying the wave equation (which solutions obeys to comp), Hmm well if you have a basis, yes; - but naked infinite-dimensional Hilbert Space (the everything in QM)? You put the finger on a

### Re: MGA 2

Hi Mirek, On 12 Jan 2009, at 15:36, Mirek Dobsicek wrote: Hello Bruno, I think you are correct, but allowing the observer to be mechanically described as obeying the wave equation (which solutions obeys to comp), Hmm well if you have a basis, yes; - but naked infinite-

### Re: KIM 2.3 (was Re: Time)

Stathis, thinking about this way (which I did when reading Egan's Permutation City) is indeed problematic - because then you would also have to let consciousness supervene on Lucky Alice (the one from MGA), right down to Super Lucky Alice (Alice which is made anew for every state through

### Re: QM Turing Universality (was: MGA 2)

Thank you for a quick answer! I'll take a look at it, my curiosity approves additional items on my TODO list :-) Best, mirek The classical universal dovetailer generates easily all the quantum computations, but I find hard to just define *one* unitary transformation, without measurement,

### Binary logic is insufficient

*The universe is not just black and white...* Or another way to state that is that two truth values (true and false) are insufficient to describe all propositions. I propose the following: If the universe exists and if

### Re: QM Turing Universality (was: MGA 2)

On 12 Jan 2009, at 17:24, Mirek Dobsicek wrote: Thank you for a quick answer! I'll take a look at it, my curiosity approves additional items on my TODO list :-) Manage keeping finite your todo list :) I have finished the reading of the paper I mentioned (Deutsch's Universal Quantum

### Re: KIM 2.3 (was Re: Time)

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 2009/1/12 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com: A machine running a program goes through a sequence of states. Consider 20 consecutive states, s1 to s20, which give rise to several moments of consciousness. Would you say that running the sequence s1 to s20 on a

### Binary Logic is Insufficient

The universe is not just black and white... Or another way to state that is that two truth values (true and false) are insufficient to describe all propositions. I propose the following: If the universe exists and if for all things X and Y, the utterance X contains Y is proposition, then the