Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 30 Sep 2018, at 08:37, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> On 29 Sep 2018, at 02:38, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> > On 28 Sep 2018, at 06:29, Bruce Kellett

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 29 Sep 2018, at 02:38, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 28 Sep 2018, at 06:29, Bruce Kellett > wrote: But you do not seem to go the

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:55:37 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 2:30:18 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 28 Sep 2018, at 20:11, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> My claim: Synthetic biology changes the definition of "program”. >> >>

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 29 Sep 2018, at 02:38, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> On 28 Sep 2018, at 06:29, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> But you do not seem to go the additional step of saying that mathematical >>> objects, numbers

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 28 Sep 2018, at 22:04, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/28/2018 2:10 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> It's not something outside mathematics that is true >> >> OK. >> >> >>> in the sense that ice is cold. >> >> >> That is also a belief by some machine, and it might be recovered in

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 28 Sep 2018, at 20:11, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 11:20:04 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 28 Sep 2018, at 13:02, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 3:07:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 27 Sep

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 28 Sep 2018, at 06:29, Bruce Kellett > wrote: But you do not seem to go the additional step of saying that mathematical objects, numbers and so on, are objects that actually exist (which would be a form of

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/28/2018 2:10 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It's not something outside mathematics that is true OK. in the sense that ice is cold. That is also a belief by some machine, and it might be recovered in their phenomenology, in arithmetic. We cannot discuss in the abstract. Doing

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 11:20:04 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Sep 2018, at 13:02, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 3:07:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 27 Sep 2018, at 21:41, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 28 Sep 2018, at 13:02, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 3:07:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 27 Sep 2018, at 21:41, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 7:44:04 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 26

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 3:07:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 27 Sep 2018, at 21:41, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 7:44:04 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 26 Sep 2018, at 19:32, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> >> I should add

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 28 Sep 2018, at 06:51, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/27/2018 9:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> >>> But now, let us move forward. Stop saying “realism or platonism”, in pour >>> metaphysical context this lead to misunderstanding. >>>

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 28 Sep 2018, at 06:29, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >> >> But now, let us move forward. Stop saying “realism or platonism”, in pour >> metaphysical context this lead to misunderstanding. >> >> Assuming classical arithmetic = arithmetical

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 27 Sep 2018, at 23:08, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/27/2018 5:38 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 27 Sep 2018, at 03:31, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> > On 26 Sep 2018, at 02:36, Bruce

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 27 Sep 2018, at 21:41, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 7:44:04 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 26 Sep 2018, at 19:32, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> I should add that in parallel to mathematical logic and computability theory >> and

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 12:03:35 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: > > From: Brent Meeker > > > > On 9/27/2018 9:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal > > > > But now, let us move forward. Stop saying “realism or platonism”, in pour > metaphysical context this lead to

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Brent Meeker* mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> On 9/27/2018 9:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> But now, let us move forward. Stop saying “realism or platonism”, in pour metaphysical context this lead to misunderstanding. Assuming classical

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/27/2018 9:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> But now, let us move forward. Stop saying “realism or platonism”, in pour metaphysical context this lead to misunderstanding. Assuming classical arithmetic = arithmetical realism. It is becoming

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> But now, let us move forward. Stop saying “realism or platonism”, in pour metaphysical context this lead to misunderstanding. Assuming classical arithmetic = arithmetical realism. It is becoming clear that we have very different

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/27/2018 5:38 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Sep 2018, at 03:31, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 26 Sep 2018, at 02:36, Bruce Kellett > wrote: I agree that the quote does not

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 7:44:04 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Sep 2018, at 19:32, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > > I should add that in parallel to mathematical logic and computability > theory and even type theory there is the somewhat more practical subject of >

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 26 Sep 2018, at 19:32, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 11:46:51 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 25 Sep 2018, at 21:20, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 12:01:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 27 Sep 2018, at 03:31, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> On 26 Sep 2018, at 02:36, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> I agree that the quote does not make sense. But it is what you said. >> >> It does not make

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 26 Sep 2018, at 02:36, Bruce Kellett > wrote: I agree that the quote does not make sense. But it is what you said. It does not make sense out of hits context. It is the the “…” which does not make sense.

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 26 Sep 2018, at 02:36, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> On 24 Sep 2018, at 02:25, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> > On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:10, Bruce

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 11:46:51 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 25 Sep 2018, at 21:20, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 12:01:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 25 Sep 2018, at 15:35, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 25 Sep 2018, at 21:20, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 12:01:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 25 Sep 2018, at 15:35, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:12:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 24

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:36:48 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: > > Elementary arithmetic, such as 2+2=4, is tautologically true. In other > words, if is true by virtue of the meaning of the terms involved. It has no > ontological content outside itself. So arithmetic is used in physics, but

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 24 Sep 2018, at 02:25, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:10, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal*

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 12:01:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 25 Sep 2018, at 15:35, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:12:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 24 Sep 2018, at 07:28, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 25 Sep 2018, at 15:35, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:12:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 24 Sep 2018, at 07:28, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 10:55:52 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 23

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:12:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 24 Sep 2018, at 07:28, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 10:55:52 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:37, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 24 Sep 2018, at 07:28, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 10:55:52 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:37, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 4:41:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 23 Sep

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 24 Sep 2018, at 05:05, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/23/2018 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> I assume mechanism (the invariant of consciousness fr some transformation), >> and derive from that, constructively, the appearances, including the >> physical appearances, so that we can

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 24 Sep 2018, at 02:25, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >> >>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:10, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> > On 23 Sep 2018, at 08:53, Bruce Kellett

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 10:55:52 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:37, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 4:41:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 23 Sep 2018, at 09:00, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/23/2018 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I assume mechanism (the invariant of consciousness fr some transformation), and derive from that, constructively, the appearances, including the physical appearances, so that we can test. But the physical appearances you derive are very thin on

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:10, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 08:53, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal*

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:50 AM Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >>it's true I am confused I don't understand, but anybody who thinks they >> understand gibberish is a fool. >> > > *> To me and probably to many others it seems obvious that the Helsinki > man can expect to end up either in Moscow or

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:37, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 4:41:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 23 Sep 2018, at 09:00, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 1:28:02 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 22 Sep

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 23 Sep 2018, at 13:10, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 08:53, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> I would say that mechanism explains

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 at 5:19 pm, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 3:39 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > *Given the definition of the first person*, [...] *By the definition >> of the first person notion* [...] >> > > You act as if you've given a robust definition of "the first person"

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 3:39 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > *Given the definition of the first person*, [...] *By the definition of > the first person notion* [...] > You act as if you've given a robust definition of "the first person" that doesn't fall apart into logical contradictions at the

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 4:41:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 23 Sep 2018, at 09:00, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 1:28:02 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 22 Sep 2018, at 11:40, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> On 23 Sep 2018, at 08:53, Bruce Kellett > wrote: From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> I would say that mechanism explains rather well consciousness, through computer science and the logic of

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 23 Sep 2018, at 08:53, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >> >> I would say that mechanism explains rather well consciousness, through >> computer science and the logic of self-reference ((which basically predict >> consciousness (indubitable, non

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 1:28:02 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 22 Sep 2018, at 11:40, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Saturday, September 22, 2018 at 2:48:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 21 Sep 2018, at 19:55, John Clark wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 19,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> I would say that mechanism explains rather well consciousness, through computer science and the logic of self-reference ((which basically predict consciousness (indubitable, non provable and non definable sort of knowledge), With that sort

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 22 Sep 2018, at 11:40, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Saturday, September 22, 2018 at 2:48:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 21 Sep 2018, at 19:55, John Clark > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:20 PM Philip Thrift > > wrote: >> >> >> Mind is what a brain

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Saturday, September 22, 2018 at 2:48:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 21 Sep 2018, at 19:55, John Clark > > wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:20 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > >> Mind is what a brain does >> >> >> > >*And walking and running is what the legs do. * >>

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 21 Sep 2018, at 19:55, John Clark wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:20 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > >> Mind is what a brain does > > >And walking and running is what the legs do. > There is no "walking" like some Platonic immaterial universal

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

John, I don’t see any argument. Just distracting statements, not even trying to hide your ontological commitment. That is pseudo-religion. You talk like a member of the clergy. Given the definition of the first person, the first person indeterminacy is probably made clearer with the iterated

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:20 PM Philip Thrift wrote: >> Mind is what a brain does > > > >*And walking and running is what the legs do. * > *There is no "walking" like some Platonic immaterial universal except for > some pair of legs to be doing it.* > Right, there is no thinking without a brain

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 7:05 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: >>If physics is not involved then neither is time or space, so nothing >> about the "machine" changes, and without change a calculation can not be >> made. > > > *>See my answer in previous post.* > In my experience reading your stuff twice

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 19 Sep 2018, at 23:14, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/19/2018 1:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 19 Sep 2018, at 03:44, Brent Meeker >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 9/18/2018 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > I don't think you know what you

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Wednesday, September 19, 2018 at 3:33:20 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 12:51 AM Brent Meeker > : > > "How did we ever get the notion of the mind as something distinct from the >> body?" > > > From the same place we got the idea that "fast" is distinct from

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/19/2018 1:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 19 Sep 2018, at 03:44, Brent Meeker > wrote: On 9/18/2018 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I don't think you know what you mean by "exist", I certainly don’t. I use “exists” as a quantifier in some theory. The

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 12:51 AM Brent Meeker : "How did we ever get the notion of the mind as something distinct from the > body?" >From the same place we got the idea that "fast" is distinct from "racing car" and "red" is distinct from "tomato". Mind is what a brain does. John K Clark >

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 11:51:28 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 9/18/2018 1:00 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > > https://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/april13/rorty-041305.html : > > > "How did we ever get the notion of the mind as something distinct from the > body? Why did this

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 19 Sep 2018, at 04:32, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/18/2018 4:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 18 Sep 2018, at 06:52, Brent Meeker >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 9/17/2018 10:21 AM, John Clark wrote: >It can be duplicated, but it cannot feel

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 19 Sep 2018, at 03:44, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/18/2018 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> I don't think you know what you mean by "exist", I certainly don’t. >> >> >> I use “exists” as a quantifier in some theory. The axioms are given in all >> textbook of logic. > > But

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 18 Sep 2018, at 22:00, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 12:04:25 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM Brent Meeker > wrote: > > >Is that even relevant. Brains are presumably psuedo-classical objects. But > >they can't be

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 18 Sep 2018, at 19:03, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM Brent Meeker > wrote: > > >Is that even relevant. Brains are presumably psuedo-classical objects. But > >they can't be strictly classical, so it seems likely that it is

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/18/2018 1:00 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 12:04:25 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM Brent Meeker > wrote: />Is that even relevant.  Brains are presumably psuedo-classical objects.  But they can't be strictly

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/18/2018 4:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 18 Sep 2018, at 06:52, Brent Meeker > wrote: On 9/17/2018 10:21 AM, John Clark wrote: />It can be duplicated, but it cannot feel the split. / If a brain can't feel the split when its duplicated, and I agree

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/18/2018 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I don't think you know what you mean by "exist", I certainly don’t. I use “exists” as a quantifier in some theory. The axioms are given in all textbook of logic. But you need to connect that meaning to the very different meaning of exists =

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 12:04:25 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM Brent Meeker > wrote: > > * >Is that even relevant. Brains are presumably psuedo-classical >> objects. But they can't be strictly classical, so it seems likely that it >> is

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM Brent Meeker wrote: * >Is that even relevant. Brains are presumably psuedo-classical objects. > But they can't be strictly classical, so it seems likely that it is > impossible to exactly duplicate a brain. * > Brains can't be duplicated exactly nor can any

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 18 Sep 2018, at 06:52, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/17/2018 10:21 AM, John Clark wrote: >> >It can be duplicated, but it cannot feel the split. >> >> If a brain can't feel the split when its duplicated, and I agree it can't, >> then EVERYTHING (my capitalization) was so

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 17 Sep 2018, at 19:21, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 5:04 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >>that says you should look for the simplest explanation and that is not > >>induction. Induction is not about explanations. Every animal with a nervous >

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/17/2018 10:21 AM, John Clark wrote: />It can be duplicated, but it cannot feel the split. / If a brain can't feel the split when its duplicated, and I agree it can't, then EVERYTHING (my capitalization) was so successfully duplicated that what the 2 brains were doing, mind, was

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 5:04 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: >>that says you should look for the simplest explanation and that is not >> induction. Induction is not about explanations. Every animal with a nervous >> system employs induction, even snails. > > > *> Yes, even jumping spider. That is why

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 12 Sep 2018, at 17:22, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/12/2018 2:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Assuming that matter exist, yes, matter appearance is Turing universal, so >> can run any other digital machine, but that does not imply that something >> else cannot run a machine, and

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/12/2018 2:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Assuming that matter exist, yes, matter appearance is Turing universal, so can run any other digital machine, but that does not imply that something else cannot run a machine, and indeed “run” has been defined first in between any two universal

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/12/2018 1:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Sep 2018, at 19:38, Brent Meeker wrote: On 9/11/2018 2:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Can the universal Diophantine equation emulate a hypercomputer? Might say more on this if asked. That has been explained already in this list more than

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 11 Sep 2018, at 21:25, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 4:59 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >>In the physical world induction is just a rule of thumb that usually works > >>pretty well most of the time, but it seldom works perfectly and never works

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 11 Sep 2018, at 19:38, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/11/2018 2:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> Can the universal Diophantine equation emulate a hypercomputer? >>> Might say more on this if asked. That has been explained already in this list more than once. Deutsch assume

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 4:59 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: >>In the physical world induction is just a rule of thumb that usually >> works pretty well most of the time, but it seldom works perfectly and never >> works continuously, eventually it always fails. > > >*? You seem to confuse mathematical

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/11/2018 2:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Can the universal Diophantine equation emulate a hypercomputer? Might say more on this if asked. That has been explained already in this list more than once. Deutsch assume a primitive physical reality. That is coherent with the CT part of

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Tuesday, September 11, 2018 at 4:06:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 11 Sep 2018, at 03:11, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 4:11:46 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> I can argue that the Church-Turing thesis entails the falsity of the >>

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 11 Sep 2018, at 01:10, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 9/10/2018 2:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 9 Sep 2018, at 21:51, Philip Thrift >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 10:04:20 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 11 Sep 2018, at 03:11, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 4:11:46 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > I can argue that the Church-Turing thesis entails the falsity of the physical > Church-Turing thesis, even without postulating Mechanism. > If we are machine,

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 4:11:46 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > I can argue that the Church-Turing thesis entails the falsity of the > physical Church-Turing thesis, even without postulating Mechanism. > If we are machine, then we can exploit the computations which supports us >

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On 9/10/2018 2:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 9 Sep 2018, at 21:51, Philip Thrift > wrote: On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 10:04:20 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:44 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: >>Nobody on this planet

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 9 Sep 2018, at 21:51, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 10:04:20 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:44 AM Bruno Marchal > > wrote: > > >>Nobody on this planet uses the term "Löbian machine" except you. > > >It is just a more precise

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 9 Sep 2018, at 17:03, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:44 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >>Nobody on this planet uses the term "Löbian machine" except you. > > >It is just a more precise version of what popular books described by > >“sufficiently

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 10:04:20 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:44 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >>Nobody on this planet uses the term "Löbian machine" except you. >> >> > > >*It is just a more precise version of what popular books described by >>

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 6:44 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: >>Nobody on this planet uses the term "Löbian machine" except you. > > >*It is just a more precise version of what popular books described by > “sufficiently rich theory”.* > There is nothing precise about homemade slang used by nobody but

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 9 Sep 2018, at 01:12, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 2:19 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > > A function is computable if we can explain to a dumb (but docile) human > > being how to compute it, on any of its argument. > > And some functions (the

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 2:19 PM Bruno Marchal wrote: > A function is computable if we can explain to a dumb (but docile) human > being how to compute it, on any of its argument. > And some functions (the Sine function for example) can be proven to be computable and some functions (the Busy

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 27 Aug 2018, at 20:02, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, August 25, 2018 at 9:11:47 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 2:21 AM > wrote: > > >I plan to study Cantor's theorem on the Internet and compare it with your > >proof. > > Every time Bruno

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Saturday, August 25, 2018 at 9:11:47 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 2:21 AM > wrote: > > >> *>I plan to study Cantor's theorem on the Internet and compare it with >> your proof.* > > > Every time Bruno useless a personal pronoun in the "proof" that involves >

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 2:21 AM wrote: > *>I plan to study Cantor's theorem on the Internet and compare it with you > proof.* Every time Bruno useless a personal pronoun in the "proof" that involves people duplicating machines ask yourself what exactly is the referent. If you can figure it

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

> On 25 Aug 2018, at 08:21, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 23, 2018 at 7:02:21 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Grayson, > > Let me explain you something crazy but absolutely important to understand > about the set of all computable function from N to N. > > It is

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

On Thursday, August 23, 2018 at 7:02:21 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Grayson, > > Let me explain you something crazy but absolutely important to understand > about the set of all computable function from N to N. > > It is true that later, we will be able to identify that with the >

Re: Why is Church's thesis a Miracle?

Grayson, people, Unlike the combinators (which is in part something asked by some of my students), in they thread, I will proceed only if at least one of you asses he understood the theorems and proofs. Grayson, it seems you are not aware of Cantor Theorem. I do not need that theorem. I gave