--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Saibal Mitra wrote:
> http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.3825
>
> I've written up a small article about the idea that you could end up in a
> different sector of the multiverse by selective memory erasure. I had written
> about that possibility a long time ago on this list, but no
Kim,
great post, thanks!
You may enjoy this TED talk:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html
As to your "laughing" friend, I also know some such people, they have in
truth not understood what science is about: asking questions, being
critical (espec
Hi Bruno,
> 1-OM, (by step 7, correspond to infinity (aleph_zero) of 3-OMs,
> themselves embedded in bigger infinities (2^aleph_zero) of
> computations going trough their corresponding states.
> Between you-in-the-living room, and you-in-the-kitchen there is
> already a continuum of storie
Hi,
this paper (Mikovic) is unfortunately not very good. I quote:
"There are strong arguments that the human mind is not computable, based
on Goedel’s theorems in logic, see [3]."
3 refers to Penrose's "Emperor's new mind".
I don't think that I have to comment this fallacy on this list. (Brun
On 11 Mar 2009, at 02:25, Günther Greindl wrote:
>
> Hi Bruno,
>
>>> The idea was that the numbers encode moments which don't have
>>> successors
>>> (the guy who transports), that's why there exist alien-OMs encoded
>>> in
>>> numbers which destroy all the machines (if we assume that arithmet
Nice! I did refer often to the Saibal Mitra backtracking procedure (in
immortality discussions). I will take a further look on your paper.
If valid, it should work in the comp frame. Amnesia could lead you to
the "original singularity", which could be a kind of blind spot of
"universal consc
Hi Ronald,
Thank you for recommending this paper. While I recognize many of the
ideas in it, it bothers me that there is no explicit attempt to explain the
"beliefs" (other that vague references to other papers/books). As I
understand the paper, Mikovi´c is propossing a type of psycho-phys
I thought I would add the paper:Temporal Platonic
Metaphysics:arxiv.org:0903.18001v1
On Mar 9, 12:26 pm, ronaldheld wrote:
> Not certain what thread this belongs in so I started up a new one.
> arxiv.org:0903.1193v1
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
2009/3/11 Wei Dai :
>
> Jack Mallah wrote:
>> They might not, but I'm sure most would; maybe not exactly that U, but a
>> lot closer to it.
>
> Can you explain why you believe that?
>
>> No. In U = Sum_i M_i Q_i, you sum over all the i's, not just the ones
>> that are similar to you. Of course y
9 matches
Mail list logo