On 7/9/2014 10:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
That means if the digital brain needed to interact with our environment, the program
would be linked to sensors giving it inputs to interact with the world out there (the
sensors are really only things that write in a shared memory space that the
2014-07-10 8:06 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/9/2014 10:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
That means if the digital brain needed to interact with our
environment, the program would be linked to sensors giving it inputs to
interact with the world out there (the sensors are
On 10 July 2014 18:51, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
meaning is not an inherent property of something.
That was my argument, too, however I do realise that it *could* be
(perhaps), given various hints from physics that information underlies the
material universe (it from bit). I
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 04:34:07PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/9/2014 10:51 AM, John Clark wrote:
Liquid Hydrogen would be a pretty good fuel for airplanes, so
let’s see how many solar cells would be needed to make the fuel to
keep one in the air. A 747 jet uses on average 140 megawatts of
Without claiming to be a wiser head, I will still say that you don't use
747s in a green economy! You use airships... And you reduce air traffic by
getting almost everyone to telecommute.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To
On 10 July 2014 04:35, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I'm not sure about physics. I think the point of the MGA is that matter
isn't primary? (As I've already mentioned, I'm not 100% au fait with the
MGA.)
It tries to show that by leading you to accept a scenario in which there
is no
On 09 Jul 2014, at 21:52, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
You may have written exhaustively on this before, but, one more time
please.
No problem. I'm always happy if I can clarify.
How do you build a theology based on mathematics. I don't see
Pythagoras as being a source of
On 09 Jul 2014, at 02:12, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Americans, like most peoples tend to be victims of our own
stupidity, in the US case, vainity. As someone who supports the
American nation state, U woyld urge you to look to your own physical
security more, because the fellow
On 09 Jul 2014, at 22:12, John Mikes wrote:
I apologize for taking a new title for this over-discussed topic.
Somebody (sounds like Bruno, the fonts look like Brent) wrote:
...let us do theology seriously instead of referring to fairy
tales. You confirm what I said to John Clark. Atheist
On 7 July 2014 20:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
So no, there's no heresy involved in such an idea
unless, IMHO, it is a blind for eliminativism.
Why? Is eliminativism then the heresy? I'm not even sure what
'eliminativism' means in this context. You seem to argue that reductive
On 10 Jul 2014, at 00:46, LizR wrote:
On 10 July 2014 06:14, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 09 Jul 2014, at 04:59, LizR wrote:
On 9 July 2014 14:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/8/2014 6:14 PM, LizR wrote:
So suppose we have a conscious computer frozen in state S1. We
On 10 Jul 2014, at 01:51, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 1:44 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/9/2014 11:38 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-09 20:35 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/8/2014 11:13 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
That's what I said. And I think
On 10 Jul 2014, at 03:22, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/9/2014 5:15 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 July 2014 11:44, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
It's saying yes, an artificial brain can maintain my consciousness
*by interacting with my environment in the same way my natural
brain did*.
By doing
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 4:06 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
--
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 2:22 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
You did not read the study I
On 10 Jul 2014, at 03:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/9/2014 6:38 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 July 2014 13:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
But I think ultimately it does. If you have do include the
environment in the computation (and Bruno has said maybe you do,
it's just a matter of level)
On 10 Jul 2014, at 04:08, LizR wrote:
Computation might be able to exist in Numberland, or so I'm told.
And as you can understand by yourself if you look closer to the
subject. Computation notion and computability have been discovered by
mathematician, working in the foundation of math
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
IIRC, the average insolation is something like 1kW/m^2, so that would
make John's solar cells around 3% efficient
At noon under ideal conditions a square meter of solar cells can produce
about 150 watts, but
On 10 Jul 2014, at 05:17, LizR wrote:
On 10 July 2014 15:01, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
Heres' a question. What would be bigger, genuine AI, or the
discovery of another technological civilization in the galaxy???
I vote for the discovery of
On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:52, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
That just show that with the right mapping of the internal of a rock
you could associate it with any computations. That kind of make the
point of Mga by invalidating the physical supervenience thesis...
Interesting. I will think about this.
On 7/10/2014 12:28 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 04:34:07PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/9/2014 10:51 AM, John Clark wrote:
Liquid Hydrogen would be a pretty good fuel for airplanes, so
let’s see how many solar cells would be needed to make the fuel to
keep one in the air.
On 7/10/2014 12:59 AM, LizR wrote:
Without claiming to be a wiser head, I will still say that you don't use 747s in a green
economy! You use airships... And you reduce air traffic by getting almost everyone to
telecommute.
The trouble with airships is that they slow and they can't handle bad
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 12:29 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: How will air travel work in a green solar economy?
On Wed, Jul 09,
On 7/10/2014 4:08 AM, David Nyman wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular sequence of physical
states. Indeed what else could it be? The states, so to speak, come first and hence the
notion that those states 'implement a computation' is always an a
The problem is not what a green economy would sustain, but where the
mass hysteria of the self appointed planet savers would be redirected
when they find that the planet does no longer need to be saved, except
from themselves.
I guess that they will be inmediately concerned by micro-agressions
2014-07-10 20:39 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 4:08 AM, David Nyman wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular
sequence of physical states. Indeed what else could it be? The states, so
to speak, come first and hence the notion that
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I assume comp
Well good for comp.
I will push on the button, and I know I will not find myself in both
city.
Exactly.
Only in one from my future first person perspective,
There are 2 future first person
On 10 July 2014 19:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular
sequence of physical states. Indeed what else could it be? The states, so
to speak, come first and hence the notion that those states 'implement a
computation' is
On 7/10/2014 12:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 20:39 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 4:08 AM, David Nyman wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular
sequence of
physical states. Indeed
On 7/10/2014 12:49 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 10 July 2014 19:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular
sequence of
physical states. Indeed what else could it be? The states, so to speak,
2014-07-10 21:56 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 12:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 20:39 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 4:08 AM, David Nyman wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular
sequence of
2014-07-10 22:21 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 12:49 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 10 July 2014 19:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In short, under physicalism, a 'computation' *just is* a particular
sequence of physical states. Indeed what else could it be?
On 7/10/2014 1:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 21:56 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 12:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 20:39 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net:
On
On 7/10/2014 1:24 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 22:21 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 12:49 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 10 July 2014 19:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In
ni
Le 10 juil. 2014 22:49, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 1:24 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 22:21 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 12:49 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 10 July 2014 19:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In short,
Le 10 juil. 2014 22:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 1:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 21:56 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014 12:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 20:39 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On
On 7/10/2014 2:06 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
But what if the feature was the relation to the external world (whether it's physical
or a simulation)? You would still say yes to the doctor (because that relation would
be preserved) and CTM would still be true.
No it wouldn't... it would not
On 7/10/2014 2:08 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 10 juil. 2014 22:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 1:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 21:56 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net:
On 7/10/2014
On 10 July 2014 21:21, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
But I think it becomes absurd only because the scenario ignores the fact
that it is the physical instantiation that provides a reference to the world
which then gives the computation meaning. It is the implicit isolation into
Le 10 juil. 2014 23:40, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 2:08 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 10 juil. 2014 22:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 1:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-07-10 21:56 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
You worldview is pretty much solid Left, and you conspiacy theories are
consistent with what it preaches, in academia, and large elements of
the news. I am not dismissing this worldview out of hand, but just
stating openly, that this view is what holds power in the execitive
branch. I don't
Emil L. Post 1936 Finite Combinatory Processes. Formulation 1. - from the
concluding paragraph:
The writer expects the present formulation to turn out to be logically
equivalent to recursiveness in the sense of the Gödel-Church development.
Its purpose, however, is not only to present a system of
On 7/10/2014 2:41 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 10 July 2014 21:21, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
But I think it becomes absurd only because the scenario ignores the fact
that it is the physical instantiation that provides a reference to the world
which then gives the computation meaning.
On 7/10/2014 2:46 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 10 juil. 2014 23:40, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 2:08 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 10 juil. 2014 22:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On
Le 11 juil. 2014 01:55, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 2:46 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 10 juil. 2014 23:40, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 2:08 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 10 juil. 2014 22:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 5:01 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It's my example and ex hypothesi they do go through the same states, they're just
*about* different things.
Either both are the same computation and goes through the same state computing the same
thing
But same thing is ambiguous. They may
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:15 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/10/2014 5:01 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It's my example and ex hypothesi they do go through the same states,
they're just *about* different things.
Either both are the same computation and goes through the same
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 01:23:35PM -0400, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
IIRC, the average insolation is something like 1kW/m^2, so that would
make John's solar cells around 3% efficient
At noon under ideal conditions a
On 7/10/2014 4:42 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 01:23:35PM -0400, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
IIRC, the average insolation is something like 1kW/m^2, so that would
make John's solar cells around 3%
On 7/10/2014 5:25 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:15 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/10/2014 5:01 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It's my example and ex hypothesi they do go through the same states,
they're
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 06:00:14PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/10/2014 4:42 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 01:23:35PM -0400, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
IIRC, the average insolation is something like
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:03 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/10/2014 5:25 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:15 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/10/2014 5:01 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It's my example and ex hypothesi they do go
On 7/10/2014 6:24 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 06:00:14PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/10/2014 4:42 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 01:23:35PM -0400, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
On 11 July 2014 06:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/10/2014 12:59 AM, LizR wrote:
Without claiming to be a wiser head, I will still say that you don't use
747s in a green economy! You use airships... And you reduce air traffic by
getting almost everyone to telecommute.
The
By the way, it looks like the US economy is starting to green...
http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/statements/2014/jul/06/sheldon-whitehouse/there-are-already-more-american-jobs-solar-industr
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List
On 7/10/2014 10:16 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 July 2014 06:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/10/2014 12:59 AM, LizR wrote:
Without claiming to be a wiser head, I will still say that you don't
use 747s in
a green economy! You use
If the MWI is correct, the electron spin question is equivalent to the
teleporter question.
In the electron spin scenario, the scientist could reasonably answer I
expect to see spin up with 50% probability, and spin-down with 50%
probability, and everyone would know what he meant. But he *could*
Le 11 juil. 2014 02:15, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 7/10/2014 5:01 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It's my example and ex hypothesi they do go through the same states,
they're just *about* different things.
Either both are the same computation and goes through the same state
57 matches
Mail list logo
