Re: The MGA revisited

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > meekerdb wrote: > >> On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> meekerdb wrote: >>> >>> As I said, conterfactual correctness has very little to do with the >>> actual conscious moment. That is given simply by the sequence of actual

Re: The MGA revisited

On 3/28/2015 11:54 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 11:02 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: The calculation written out on paper is a static thing, but the result of that calculation might still be part of a simulation that produces consciousness. Though, unless B

Re: The MGA revisited

meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 11:02 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: The calculation written out on paper is a static thing, but the result of that calculation might still be part of a simulation that produces consciousness. Though, unless Barbour is right and the actuality of time ca

Re: The MGA revisited

meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: You're saying the static written out calculation instantiates a bit of consciousness? Does it matter in what language it is written or whether anyone can read it? In some language it might just be a single line, as

Re: The MGA revisited

meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: As I said, conterfactual correctness has very little to do with the actual conscious moment. That is given simply by the sequence of actual brain states -- But what is "a brain state". Can a part of the brain be i

Re: The MGA revisited

meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: Another possibility is that all those neurons that /*didn't*/ fire in the calculation were just as necessary to the experience as the one's that did. That seems quite plausible to me. I find the notion quite bizarre

Re: The MGA revisited

On 3/28/2015 11:02 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: No, as I said, I do not think it is helpful to describe the sequence of brain states as a calculation. If you simulate the actual brain states by doing a lot of calculations on a computer,

Re: The MGA revisited

meekerdb wrote: On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: No, as I said, I do not think it is helpful to describe the sequence of brain states as a calculation. If you simulate the actual brain states by doing a lot of calculations on a computer, then you will reproduce the original consci

Re: Life in the Islamic State for women

On 3/28/2015 5:33 PM, Kim Jones wrote: The female perspective: as hunter-gatherers (we have never stopped being this) it makes sense to mate with the blokes who command the most resources! This is the motivating factor. Bad boy behaviour is sexy because it promises powerfully well for a woman's

Re: Life in the Islamic State for women

On 28 Mar 2015, at 9:12 pm, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Hi Kim, > >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Kim Jones wrote: >>> On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR wrote: >>> >>> http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 >> >> So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are >> t

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, > And I'm perfectly satisfied with that because that is who I really am. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, I've tried one more time, it was pointless. Quentin Le 28 mars 2015 23:41, "John Clark" a écrit : > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > *> Please explain then* *logically* *how it's different from the simple >> duplication ex

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: *> Please explain then* *logically* *how it's different from the simple > duplication experiment* > No, there would be no point. I've already explained my reasoning over and over and over again and your rebuttal is always exactly the same, "Liar Clark

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > John, Clearly – you must admit -- there is a certain qualitative > difference between calling someone a Liar and calling someone a Horse > Fucker. Yes I could not agree with you more, they

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > > There is the man who remembers being in Brussels, and is now in > Washington. There is the man who remembers being in Brussels and is now in > Moscow. Both men share the exact same memores prior to Brussels. > OK. > > Both man remember not being

Re: Something from nothing -- my attempt of derivation of a UTM.

Bruno: is an* EMPTY SET *indeed nothingness? Does it not include the "* S E T "* recognizing that it is EMPTY? nothingness may be the CONTENT of the empty set. Just as a singularity, which has borders to end, measures, characteristics etc.? Nothingness as empty set should be infinite and include

Re: Life in the Islamic State for women

On 3/28/2015 3:12 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Many people (notably feminists) complain about the "alpha-male" sociopathic douchebag ruining society for everyone. But then, if you investigate further, this archetype has a lot of success with women. Of course the attractiveness of the bad-boy rocke

Re: The MGA revisited

Le 28 mars 2015 21:53, "meekerdb" a écrit : > > On 3/28/2015 1:32 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> > But that seems to rely on something (a soul) in addition to the numbers that is conscious and supplies the meaning. >> >> No it's like current image recognition programs, the "meaning" built by run

Re: The MGA revisited

On 3/28/2015 1:32 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > But that seems to rely on something (a soul) in addition to the numbers that is conscious and supplies the meaning. No it's like current image recognition programs, the "meaning" built by running the neuronals network algorithm is internal to th

Re: The MGA revisited

On 3/28/2015 12:33 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: On 3/27/2015 4:54 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: I understand counterfactual correctness, but I think the concept is misapplied -- even to the extent of making a category error. Counterfactual correctness can be ascribed to a computer/cal

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

2015-03-28 21:24 GMT+01:00 John Clark : > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > In the Answer this: of MWI, you're about to perform an electron spin >> measurement experiment. Before the experiment, the experimenter is asked >> what is the probability he will measure spin up? What wo

Re: The MGA revisited

Le 28 mars 2015 21:20, "meekerdb" a écrit : > > On 3/28/2015 2:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> Le 28 mars 2015 00:50, "meekerdb" a écrit : >> > >> > On 3/27/2015 3:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Le 27 mars 2015 23:09, "meekerdb" a écrit : >> >> > >> >> > On 3/27/2015 4:06 AM

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > In the Answer this: of MWI, you're about to perform an electron spin > measurement experiment. Before the experiment, the experimenter is asked > what is the probability he will measure spin up? What would you answer if > you were the experimenter ?

Re: The MGA revisited

On 3/28/2015 2:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Le 28 mars 2015 00:50, "meekerdb" mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> a écrit : > > On 3/27/2015 3:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> Le 27 mars 2015 23:09, "meekerdb" > a écrit : >> > >> > On 3/27/2015 4:06 AM, Quentin A

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > 2015-03-28 19:04 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes : > >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 6:01 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >>> >>> > Is anyone else worried that the list is descending to

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

2015-03-28 19:04 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes : > > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 6:01 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> > Is anyone else worried that the list is descending to a low place? >>> >> >> It's interesting, Quentin The Horse Fucker has been

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 6:01 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > Is anyone else worried that the list is descending to a low place? >> > > It's interesting, Quentin The Horse Fucker has been calling me "Liar > Clark" about every other day since Dece

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

John, Clearly – you must admit -- there is a certain qualitative difference between calling someone a Liar and calling someone a Horse Fucker. Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 10:01

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 5:40 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > You are saying that step 3 is trivial, so you admit that it is correct >> > > No. The first 2 steps are trivialities dressed up in pompous language, but > in step 3 Bruno doesn't know what he'

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness--

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of “We're all islands shouting lies to each other across seas of misunderstanding.” ― Rudyard Kipling,

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

Poor man... Answer this: In the context of MWI, you're about to perform an electron spin measurement experiment. Before the experiment, the experimenter is asked what is the probability he will measure spin up? What would you answer if you were the experimenter ? As we are in MWI context, it's a

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Is anyone else worried that the list is descending to a low place? > It's interesting, Quentin The Horse Fucker has been calling me "Liar Clark" about every other day since December 23 2013, and yet in all those preceding 15 months there was not

Re: Something from nothing -- my attempt of derivation of a UTM.

On 28 Mar 2015, at 10:22, Mindey I. wrote: Hi Everyone, so, my background: http://mindey.com/42 -- I always wanted to know its origin precisely. The understanding of the origin of Universe(=Everything, Multiverse, and our Life experience included) was likely never fully successful. Fundamenta

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > You are saying that step 3 is trivial, so you admit that it is correct > No. The first 2 steps are trivialities dressed up in pompous language, but in step 3 Bruno doesn't know what he's talking about, and I mean that literally not figuratively. The e

Re: Something from nothing -- my attempt of derivation of a UTM.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Mindey I. wrote: > Hi Everyone, > Hi Mindey, welcome. > > so, my background: http://mindey.com/42 -- I always wanted to know its > origin precisely. > > The understanding of the origin of Universe(=Everything, Multiverse, > and our Life experience included) wa

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 5:41 AM, LizR wrote: > Sadly, it's quite clear that Mr Clark has no wish to engage with the > argument being presented. It's fair to say that on this subject, at least, > rather than attempt to understand the point being made, he's resorted to > insults and dismissive "cle

Re: Life in the Islamic State for women

Hi Kim, On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Kim Jones wrote: > On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR wrote: > > http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 > > > So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People > are turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing

Something from nothing -- my attempt of derivation of a UTM.

Hi Everyone, so, my background: http://mindey.com/42 -- I always wanted to know its origin precisely. The understanding of the origin of Universe(=Everything, Multiverse, and our Life experience included) was likely never fully successful. Fundamental obstacle for succeeding in it has been the lo

Re: The MGA revisited

Le 28 mars 2015 08:33, "Bruce Kellett" a écrit : > > meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 3/27/2015 4:54 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >>> >>> >>> I understand counterfactual correctness, but I think the concept is misapplied -- even to the extent of making a category error. Counterfactual correctness can be ascri

Re: The MGA revisited

Le 28 mars 2015 01:03, "Bruce Kellett" a écrit : > > Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 27 Mar 2015, at 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Mar 2015, at 16:35, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > If my mind is being run on two separate computers, I can't

Re: The MGA revisited

Le 28 mars 2015 00:50, "meekerdb" a écrit : > > On 3/27/2015 3:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> Le 27 mars 2015 23:09, "meekerdb" a écrit : >> > >> > On 3/27/2015 4:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2015-03-27 11:44 GMT+01:00 LizR : >> >>> >> >>> On 27 March 2015 at 23:2

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On 27 Mar 2015, at 22:09, John Mikes wrote: Brent and Bruno: your discussion (Not even related to the title of "2 different forms of entropy" at all) lit an insight into my aging mind: My "agnosticism" is relative. I 'believe' (=have faith in) certain facets and exercise my so called agno

Re: The MGA revisited

On 28 Mar 2015, at 00:50, meekerdb wrote: On 3/27/2015 3:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Le 27 mars 2015 23:09, "meekerdb" a écrit : > > On 3/27/2015 4:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> 2015-03-27 11:44 GMT+01:00 LizR : >>> >>> On 27 March 2015 at 23:24, Quentin Anciaux wrote:

Re: The MGA revisited

On 28 Mar 2015, at 08:33, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: On 3/27/2015 4:54 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: I understand counterfactual correctness, but I think the concept is misapplied -- even to the extent of making a category error. Counterfactual correctness can be ascribed to a compu

Re: The MGA revisited

On 28 Mar 2015, at 01:04, Bruce Kellett wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Mar 2015, at 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Mar 2015, at 16:35, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: If my mind is being run on two separate computers, I can't know which one of the two, and I can't s

Re: The MGA revisited

On 28 Mar 2015, at 00:54, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: On 3/26/2015 11:05 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: I don't think even this follows. A computation is a computation -- it gives a definite result for definite inputs. It still counts as a computation even if the same program running

Re: The MGA revisited

meekerdb wrote: On 3/27/2015 4:54 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: I understand counterfactual correctness, but I think the concept is misapplied -- even to the extent of making a category error. Counterfactual correctness can be ascribed to a computer/calculator but not to a calculation. A calculat

Re: The MGA revisited

On 27 Mar 2015, at 02:04, Bruce Kellett wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Mar 2015, at 08:05, Bruce Kellett wrote: I simply say, so what! Counterfactual equivalence does not have any independent justification, and it is highly unlike to be sensible, even in the context of computationalis