Kelly wrote:
> On Apr 22, 12:24 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>>> So for that to be a plausible scenario we have to
>>> say that a person at a particular instant in time can be fully
>>> described by some set of data.
>>>
>> Not fully. I agree with Brent that you need an interpreter to mak
On Apr 22, 12:24 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> So for that to be a plausible scenario we have to
>> say that a person at a particular instant in time can be fully
>> described by some set of data.
>
> Not fully. I agree with Brent that you need an interpreter to make
> that person manifest herself
Kelly wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2:02 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>> I was with you up to that last sentence. Forward or backward, we just
>> experience increasing entropy as increasing time, but that doesn't
>> warrant the conclusion that no process is required and an "instant"
>> within itself has a
On Apr 22, 2:02 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> I was with you up to that last sentence. Forward or backward, we just
> experience increasing entropy as increasing time, but that doesn't
> warrant the conclusion that no process is required and an "instant"
> within itself has an arrow of time.
It see
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> 2009/4/24 Brent Meeker :
>
>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>>> 2009/4/23 Brent Meeker :
>>>
>>>
> Say a machine is in two separate parts M1 and M2, and the information
> on M1 in state A is written to a punchcard, walked over to M2, loaded,
2009/4/24 Brent Meeker :
>
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>> 2009/4/23 Brent Meeker :
>>
Say a machine is in two separate parts M1 and M2, and the information
on M1 in state A is written to a punchcard, walked over to M2, loaded,
and M2 goes into state B. Then what you are suggesting
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> 2009/4/23 Brent Meeker :
>
>>> Say a machine is in two separate parts M1 and M2, and the information
>>> on M1 in state A is written to a punchcard, walked over to M2, loaded,
>>> and M2 goes into state B. Then what you are suggesting is that this
>>> sequence could g
On 22 Apr 2009, at 20:41, Jason Resch wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Kelly wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 21, 11:31 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> We could say that a state A access to a state B if there is a
>>> universal machine (a universal number relation) transforming A
>>> into B.
>>>
2009/4/23 Brent Meeker :
>> Say a machine is in two separate parts M1 and M2, and the information
>> on M1 in state A is written to a punchcard, walked over to M2, loaded,
>> and M2 goes into state B. Then what you are suggesting is that this
>> sequence could give rise to a few moments of consci
9 matches
Mail list logo
