Re: Re: Re: Where's the fixed identity in turing machines and comp ?

ROGER: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 05:55:03AM -0500, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Russell Standish > > No, rational beings have to decide which truths they need to apply > to what and how to apply them. These are all relational acts, > which require choice, hence intelligence. > RUSS: I will insist

How wonderful greed is

Hi Russell Standish Below you infer that economics is a rational activity. It isn't. it's close to a branch of psychology. Buying stocks, as Gordon Gekko said in "Wall Street", is usually based not merely on desire, but desire in the face of risk. Then Greed seems to be the best word in that

Re: Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

Hi Russell Standish Consciousness and intelligence, not just consciousness. A cave man had to determine if a twig lying on the ground is a snake or a twig. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/12/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the f

Re: Re: Where's the fixed identity in turing machines and comp ?

Hi Russell Standish Reason is what allows us to exist in the face of desire and danger. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/12/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Russell Standish Receiver: everything

the "God" hypothesis

Hi Stephen P. King Leibniz thought that everything needs a sufficient reason to exist as it does. Thus all of the parts of the universe have a sufficient reason to be (as they are). I don't know how to explain that by anything other than the the "God" hypothesis. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizo

Re: Where's the fixed identity in turing machines and comp ?

On 11/12/2012 2:53 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/11/11 Stephen P. King > On 11/11/2012 11:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Nov 2012, at 17:44, meekerdb wrote: On 11/9/2012 3:26 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: It seems to me that we automati

Re: Re: WHY FREE WILL IS A BOGUS ISSUE

Hi meekerdb Those are the complaints of the far left. They hate everything that has authority or power. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/12/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everyth

Re: the "God" hypothesis

On 11/12/2012 7:29 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Leibniz thought that everything needs a sufficient reason to exist as it does. Thus all of the parts of the universe have a sufficient reason to be (as they are). I don't know how to explain that by anything other than the the "God"

Re: I am a realist rather than a nominalist because universal gravity exists.

On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 8:32:27 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: > > > > Physics thus tells us that a falling tree will make > a sound even if nobody is there to witness the event. > Just the opposite. Physics tells us that sound is an experience for subjects who have some kind of ear. Without t

Re: the "God" hypothesis

Hi Roger Clough, Actually the action of mathematical physics gives "everything" the reason to live. As Hawking says, there is "no need for god if you got quantum gravity". I confess to giving cosmic consciousness a reason to live. http://vixra.org/pdf/1101.0044v1.pdf Hopefully, a benevolent, und

Re: Against Mechanism

On 11 Nov 2012, at 19:53, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> the main problem is that you're striving to somehow get the Helsinki man to remember the future, > To predict it. Precisely to predict its personal memory of the past, in the future.

Re: My embarassing misunderstanding of the intelligence of computers

Doesn't mean that a coffee filter is intelligent too? If so, is a series of coffee filters more intelligent than one? What about one with a hole in it? Craig On Sunday, November 11, 2012 8:14:05 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: > > Hi > > I was wrong. > > According to my own definition of intelligenc

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 11 Nov 2012, at 20:46, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/10/2012 8:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 05:14:47PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 1:31 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: No problem. UDA shows the equivalent propositions: (MAT is weak materialism: the doctrine tha

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 11 Nov 2012, at 21:16, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/10/2012 10:02 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 5:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 05:14:47PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 1:31 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: No problem. UDA shows the equivalent propositions: (

Re: 14 billion years ago there was a huge explosion

On 11 Nov 2012, at 23:35, Russell Standish wrote: Rubbish, it not a measurement of the age of the universe, but rather of the Hubble constant. It only corresponds to the age of the universe in the context of a specific theory, usually the Friedmann universe, which is one of the simplests soluti

Re: Plato's cave analogy

On 11 Nov 2012, at 23:35, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/11/2012 10:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Nov 2012, at 12:32, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Plato says that we all live in a dark cave, seeing only shadows on the wall, eager to see the light outside. So there is at least a d

Re: Where's the fixed identity in turing machines and comp ?

On 11 Nov 2012, at 23:43, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/11/2012 11:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Nov 2012, at 17:44, meekerdb wrote: On 11/9/2012 3:26 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: It seems to me that we automatically get a 'fixed identity' when we consider each observer's 1p to be

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 12 Nov 2012, at 00:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/11/2012 12:20 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Nov 2012, at 05:00, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 07:02:04PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 5:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote: I think the argument is that association

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 12 Nov 2012, at 01:13, freqflyer07281972 wrote: So why the big fuss over teleportation when the UDA is really all about establishing that comp is consistent and implies computational/ machine metaphysics rather than materialism? Well, it would seem to me the entire argument stands or fal

Re: Evolutionary logic Re: Some musings on is/ought and modal logic

On 12 Nov 2012, at 02:59, meekerdb wrote: On 11/11/2012 8:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I have seen some physical terms, but no materialistic term. To provide the logic, you need to gives the axioms to which the B, O, [], etc. obey, and you should provide semantics, and make clear the rel

Re: the "God" hypothesis

On 12 Nov 2012, at 13:29, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Leibniz thought that everything needs a sufficient reason to exist as it does. Thus all of the parts of the universe have a sufficient reason to be (as they are). I don't know how to explain that by anything other than the the "

Re: the "God" hypothesis

On 12 Nov 2012, at 15:55, Richard Ruquist wrote: Hi Roger Clough, Actually the action of mathematical physics gives "everything" the reason to live. As Hawking says, there is "no need for god if you got quantum gravity". I confess to giving cosmic consciousness a reason to live. http://vix

Re: the "God" hypothesis

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 12 Nov 2012, at 15:55, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> Hi Roger Clough, >> >> Actually the action of mathematical physics gives "everything" the >> reason to live. >> As Hawking says, there is "no need for god if you got quantum gravity". >

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 12 Nov 2012, at 17:08, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Nov 2012, at 21:16, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/10/2012 10:02 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 5:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 05:14:47PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 1:31 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: No

Re: Against Mechanism

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> I have no idea what " its personal memory of the past in the future" >> means > > > > It is the content of the diary that the candidate brings with him in the > teleportation box, and in which he will put the result of his > self-localization after ha

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 11/12/2012 11:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Nov 2012, at 21:16, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/10/2012 10:02 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 5:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 05:14:47PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 11/10/2012 1:31 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: No prob

Re: Plato's cave analogy

On 11/12/2012 11:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Nov 2012, at 23:35, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/11/2012 10:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Nov 2012, at 12:32, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Plato says that we all live in a dark cave, seeing only shadows on the wall, eager to s

Re: 14 billion years ago there was a huge explosion

The Bartender speaketh: Russell and Bruno, IMO all (cosmological?) start-up theories (incl. the Friedmann one, my contemporaneous one) include a vision of TODAY's universe- physics, gravity, sizes, math etc. - absolutely rubbish down from the zillion-times values that could have been in the 'pre-e

Re: How wonderful greed is

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 07:11:40AM -0500, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Russell Standish > > Below you infer that economics is a rational activity. > It isn't. it's close to a branch of psychology. You misconstrue me if you think this. Firstly, I'm not an economist, so my opinions on the subject do

Re: Doesn't UDA simply imply that teleportation is impossible?

On 11/12/2012 12:50 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 17:08, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Nov 2012, at 21:16, Stephen P. King wrote: This is what I wish to know and understand as well! AFAIK, comp seems to only define a single conscious mind! ? That is contradicted by step 3,

Re: How wonderful greed is

On 11/12/2012 6:55 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 07:11:40AM -0500, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Russell Standish Below you infer that economics is a rational activity. It isn't. it's close to a branch of psychology. You misconstrue me if you think this. Firstly, I'm not an econ

Re: Reality as Dust

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Stephen P. King > wrote: >> On 11/8/2012 10:04 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >>> >>> The compact manifolds, what I call string theory monads, are more >>> fundamental than strings. Strings with spin, charge a

Re: Arithmetic doesn't even suggest geometry, let alone awareness.

On Sun, Nov 11, 2012Craig Weinberg wrote: >> I do know that over the past year you have told this list that >> information does not exist, and neither do electrons or time or space or >> bits or even logic, so I don't see why the nonexistence of movement in a >> "comp universe" or any other sort