On 31/01/2009, at 3:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> I've also tried to dig through both Bruno's thesis with the help of
>> google translator. It works for a while but soon one hits a wall
>> with a
>> difficult sentence/paragraph which is hard to understand even if it
>> stands as the author i
On 29 Jan 2009, at 20:42, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
> Why would the movie graph rule out a notion of *computational*
> supervenience. We can keep comp and abandon materialism. We can
> still say yes to the digitalist doctor, by betting on our more
> probable relative computational histori
Hi Mirek,
>
>
>>> I would certainly like to read the book - I managed a bit the Lille
>>> thesis (with my French), but it was hard going and I think I only
>>> understood the stuff because we have had many discussions here on
>>> the
>>> list - so it was easy to "translate". I am not so sure I
> > In a sense, I don't see how a computation could be "cancelled" by
> > another one.
>
About a year ago I asked Deutsch about cancellation. My idea was that
universes could annihilate each other if a particle was out of phase with
its counterpart in another otherwise consistent universe. He said
4 matches
Mail list logo
