Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 17 January 2014 14:00, Jason Resch wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:49 PM, LizR wrote: > >> On 17 January 2014 13:43, Jason Resch wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:42 PM, LizR wrote: >>> >>>> On 17 January 2014 13:34, Stathis Papaioa

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 17 January 2014 14:00, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > At least *weak* AI would be possible. Weak AI means computers could do > everything we do but without necessarily being conscious. Strong AI > means they would also be conscious. > > I checked the definition a short whle ago on Wikipedia

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 17 January 2014 14:17, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Historically, AI researchers did not consider the question of whether > a computer that behaves intelligently was conscious, on the assumption > that intelligence was observable while consciousness was not and > therefore not a fit subject fo

Re: My usual crossword challenge

On 17 January 2014 18:52, Russell Standish wrote: > but usually I find cryptic crosswords infuriating :). > Of course, otherwise I wouldn't be doing my job! The question is whether or not you find that fun. To quote some of my regular solvers "delicious torment awaits!" -- You received this m

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 18 January 2014 10:13, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 17 Jan 2014, at 14:17, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Bruno, > > Of course I assume ALL established science, QM, SR, GR and all the rest, > always subject to correction and improvement of the science of course. > > You assume a primitive physical re

Re:

On 18 January 2014 01:32, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > Is it a coincidence that: > > -During the cold war the image of the universe and the theory that > explained it was an inmense nuclear explosion? > Obviously there is a connection. Without the theories of nuclear physics you can't build H-bomb

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 17 January 2014 18:03, meekerdb wrote: > Briefly, computationalism is the idea that you could replace the brain >> with a Turing machine and you would preserve the mind. This would not >> be possible if there is non-computable physics in the brain, >> > > Just to clarify, as I understand Bruno

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 17 January 2014 20:55, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > 2014/1/16 LizR > >> On 17 January 2014 10:01, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >>> >>>> You can disagree, but it's a fact, we can make video game, so we can >>>> make any rules we want in t

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

> > I hope I will be able to clarify, after explaining the modal logic, why > comp put maximal constraints on the physical law, making all the rest > different instantiations of those laws. > I will be very interested to know why this is so, assuming my brain can handle it. A lot of people have wo

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 11:16, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:04 PM, LizR wrote: > >> On 17 January 2014 18:03, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> Briefly, computationalism is the idea that you could replace the brain >>>> with a Turing machine a

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 11:39, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear John, > > I invite your comment on a statement and question: *There is not > observable difference between "X is non-computable" and "there does not > exist sufficient resources to complete the computation of Y".* > > Are X and Y effect

Re: everything list note :)

On 17 January 2014 22:10, Chris de Morsella wrote: > Personally I think the cosmos is a musical entity even more profoundly > than it is a mathematical entity > > That would certainly fit in with "string theory" (although I think the percussion and wind theories have something going for them, too

Re:

On 18 January 2014 11:28, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 4:32 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > > For me the deepest question is not what is true about the ultimate > reality. That is a question that never ever can be answered without > faith. > > I always find it amusing that whatever question sci

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 18 January 2014 11:34, meekerdb wrote: > It doesn't mean anything. There are microtubles in all cells. So why > don't I think with my penis...oh...never mind. :-) > Teehee. You're not the messiah, you're a very naught boy! I thought Tegmark showed that the Penrose theory is unlikely (by

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

Indeed it would be very strange, perhaps verging on miraculous. I believe just the nuclear resonance discovered by Hoyle alone is already incredibly fine tuned, after which we have the amazing properties of carbon and water, and the cosmological flatness and god (ahem) knows what else. On 18 Janua

Re:

Hi Alberto i think your basic point came across even if the post was unfinished. I have attempted to reply to it above. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

Re: everything list note :)

On 18 January 2014 12:27, Chris de Morsella wrote: > > > > > *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *LizR > *Sent:* Friday, January 17, 2014 3:06 PM > *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com > *Subject

Re: Sum of all natural numbers = -1/12?

The demonstration that the sum of the positive integers is -1/12 relies on the assumption that the sum of 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 is 1/2 However that is by no means certain. The sum could be undefined, in which case the proof simply fails. Or it cou

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 18 January 2014 13:01, Russell Standish wrote: > On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:10:23PM +1300, LizR wrote: > > On 18 January 2014 11:34, meekerdb wrote: > > > > > It doesn't mean anything. There are microtubles in all cells. So why > > > don

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 13:48, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 2:04 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 17 January 2014 18:03, meekerdb wrote: > >> Briefly, computationalism is the idea that you could replace the brain >>> with a Turing machine and you would preserve the mind. This w

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 18 January 2014 15:42, Russell Standish wrote: > Irrational acts would be those where no such analysis took place - > such as acting on a hunch, or going by gut instinct, or just going > beserk. > But something caused that person to perform that action. Maybe Instinct or unconscious processin

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 18 January 2014 16:08, Jason Resch wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2014, at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: > > On 1/17/2014 2:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > PA is a reality, by itself, indeed an existing Löbian machine, and PA > talks about a reality which is vaster than PA, and that no machine can > grasp i

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

l survey of universes to check out how many have acquired life. On 18 January 2014 16:55, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 3:13 PM, LizR wrote: > > Indeed it would be very strange, perhaps verging on miraculous. I believe > just the nuclear resonance discovered by Hoyle alone is alrea

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 17:16, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: > > But apparently the brain has a lot to do with those computations in >> Platonia, c.f. anesthetic. Notice that I'm not a disciple of Platonia. >> > > Me neither, I am agnostic - b

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 18 January 2014 13:33, Russell Standish wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:08:08PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Russell, > > > > PS: On second thought maybe we don't agree completely. Though free will > is > > quantum random based (we agree on that), it doesn't mean that it is > > "irratio

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 18 January 2014 17:38, Jason Resch wrote: > What are your thoughts regarding > compatibilism? > Do you consider it a cop-out? > > It appears to say that "free will" is being able to act without interference from others, or words to that effect. Thi

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 18 January 2014 18:49, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote: > > Surprisingly, perhaps, such acts sometimes deliver payoffs to the actor. >> > > Yes, for example, in cases where doing something is better than doing > nothing. > > > Or where it

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 18 January 2014 18:50, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 7:34 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 18 January 2014 16:08, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> On Jan 17, 2014, at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 1/17/2014 2:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> PA is a

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 18 January 2014 19:02, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 8:17 PM, LizR wrote: > > OK, I withdraw the incredibly. I'm just going by what folks tell me on > this, plus no doubt a natural tendency towards hyperbole. > > So we still have the properties of water and car

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 19:12, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 8:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:16 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/17/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> But apparently the brain has a lot to do with those computations in >>

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

Hence my suggestion that we just need to sample a lot of universes... :-) On 18 January 2014 19:17, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 8:35 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 9:55 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/17/2014 3:13 PM, LizR wrote: &g

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 18 January 2014 19:45, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 10:16 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > The laws of arithmetic prevent you from writing down more than 2 distinct >> factors of 17. >> > 17 = (17/4)*4 > > I've got a million of'em. > ... using integers, which we know were created by God, rathe

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 19:51, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 10:18 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 18 January 2014 19:12, meekerdb wrote: > >> But where does it exist? X has to be conscious of a location, a >> physics, etc. If all this is the same as where I exist, then it is

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 18 January 2014 20:35, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/17/2014 11:03 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:55 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/17/2014 10:23 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> If mathematical statements are true independent of anything else then >> mathematical truth can serve

Re: Sum of all natural numbers = -1/12?

It was that wonderful Indian mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan who first came up with the proof in 1913. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanujan_summation -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and st

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On 18 January 2014 04:47, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > On Friday, January 17, 2014 6:14:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 16 Jan 2014, at 20:12, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 1/16/2014 3:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> The "singularity" is in the past, and is the discovery of the universal >> m

Mapping the heart of darkness

This is quite awesome, and I mean that in its real sense rather than the cheap sense it's thrown around nowadays. 50 years ago ... they asked what are quasars? Now we are mapping the property of Sagitarius A, the supermassive black hole at the centre of our galaxy, by tracing the orbits of stars an

Re: Sum of all natural numbers = -1/12?

On 18 January 2014 23:34, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Alberto, > > What is amusing is that Ramanujan said this (that 1+2+3+... = -1/12) in a > letter to find a job in England, just to illustrate that he was not bad in > computing. He was of course considered as crackpot until the letter was > given to

Re:

I am often in that state myself. The real world (whatever that is) keeps intruding. On 19 January 2014 01:44, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > Yes; I know. Unfortunately, as is often the case, I have no time to > reply with the attention that it deserves. > > 2014/1/18, LizR : &g

Re: Anesthesia

On 19 January 2014 07:09, Jason Resch wrote: > > I suppose it makes sense considering the brain is essentially a big lump > of fat. > > OK, that's it, no more diets. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this g

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 19 January 2014 05:54, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear Bruno, > > I do not claim that UDA is "flawed". I claim it is incomplete and based on > a false premise. The problem is the assumption that one can reason as if > the physical world does not exist and discuss ideas that imply the > existenc

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 18 January 2014 23:24, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Interesting. This illustrates perhaps some spectrum of different > "geographies" possible, with the same physics, but different parameters. > The WAP requires that, otherwise the fine tuning starts to look a little (tries to think of a word acce

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On 19 January 2014 05:26, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear Bruno, > > Could you ever stop being obtuse? > Dear Stephen, Please don't start sounding like Edgar... Please don't imply that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On 19 January 2014 11:16, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > I know. I deserved that. It is just frustrating to explain something and > get a blank look in response. > Do you have any teenage kids?!? :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to th

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 19 January 2014 10:52, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > To the contrary! Bruno seems to eschew the very idea of Becoming! > He appears to derive it from something static and eternal, hence the next question... > > I have to ask, do you accept block universes? If not imho you're probably > arguin

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

It would seem that "sufficiently advanced technology" will eventually be able to detect all the neural correlates of consciousness. Maybe a p-zombie should be defined as something that has the neural correlates of consciousness but is still somehow not conscious. Or that there ain't no such animal

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 19 January 2014 11:49, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > >>> I will write it again. Block Universes are an incoherent idea. It only >>> seems to work because we imagine tem as existing out there and subject to >>> our inspection from the outside. As if we are God or something... This very >>> idea is

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 19 January 2014 16:05, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/18/2014 1:09 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 18 January 2014 19:51, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/17/2014 10:18 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 18 January 2014 19:12, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> But where does it e

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 19 January 2014 16:19, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > >Here is one way to see my worry. I can put my desktop under a scanning > tunneling microscope and various devices. Will it still operate the same > while it is scanned down its version of the substitution level?

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 19 January 2014 16:28, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear Brent, > On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:05 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> Not so cotton-picking fast! Where is discussion of the proofs of said >> "necessarily true" maths? I could be handed a papyrus scroll covered with >> indecipherable chicken s

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 19 January 2014 16:51, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > "However, there does seem to be a problem that needs explaining, > concerning why there is something rather than nothing, and what breathes > fire into the equations. " > > Any remarks on my pro

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 19 January 2014 16:55, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:44 PM, LizR wrote: > >> On 19 January 2014 16:28, Stephen Paul King >> wrote: >> >>> I am OK with postulating, but it is something like an observer that is >>&

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 19 January 2014 18:33, Russell Standish wrote: > > > > So much for free will, except as a synonym for instinct, unconscious > urges > > and rational unpredictability. > > > > That's exactly how I use the term "free will". What other possible > meanings might it have? > People seem to think al

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 19 January 2014 17:05, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > In my thinking the integers are one form of Something. They have an > opposite. The classes of physical systems that can be used to implement > them. 2 apples are an implementation of the number 2. The dynamics of >

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 20 January 2014 03:03, Jason Resch wrote: > Could an uploaded brain running on a deterministic computer act > irrationally or creatively? (assuming it's entire source code was open > source and it had no access to enviromental randomness) > According to comp it could, because it's equivalent

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 20 January 2014 08:00, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> > nobody would buy an argument of a lawyer saying that his client is not >> guilty, because his client is just a bunch of particles obeying to the SWE. > > > I would buy the argument that m

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 20 January 2014 08:56, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/18/2014 7:38 PM, LizR wrote: > > Or it could be because we, denizens of this physics/universe, invent >> them. >> >> Why would that make it effective, though? After all we also invented > fairy tales, and conspira

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 20 January 2014 10:39, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/19/2014 1:26 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 20 January 2014 08:56, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/18/2014 7:38 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> Or it could be because we, denizens of this physics/universe, invent >>> them. >

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 20 January 2014 06:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > We can logically conceive them. Imagine a dead corpse. You can easily > conceive that he is not conscious. Now, animate the dead corpse so that it > behaves like he was alive, but keep conceiving that it is unconscious, a > bit like an actor in a

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

One problem, surely, in real life is not knowing what the other person's "utility function" is? So someone may behave apparently irrationally - e.g. giving away money - because their utility function involves making themselves feel good, or getting a reward in heaven, or they want to show off how g

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 20 January 2014 16:09, Russell Standish wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 01:40:45PM +1300, LizR wrote: > > One problem, surely, in real life is not knowing what the other person's > > "utility function" is? So someone may behave apparently irrationally - > e.g

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 20 January 2014 19:43, Russell Standish wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 10:13:22PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: > > On 1/19/2014 7:09 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > > >That's not the definition. A rational agent is someone who always > > >chooses the optimal course of action, not that there might be

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 20 January 2014 18:51, meekerdb wrote: > > You seem not to appreciate that this dissipates the one essential > advantage of mathematical monism: we understand mathematics (because, I > say, we invent it). But if it's a mere human invention trying to model the > Platonic ding and sich then PA

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 20 January 2014 18:55, meekerdb wrote: > > The modeling of the world is in our interpretation of it, a mapping from > the observable world into mathematics, manipulation and inference, and the > interpretation of the result as applying to the observable world. If it > works to a lot of decima

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

Is that the motto of the Golden Dawn? On 20 January 2014 20:01, meekerdb wrote: > "EVERYTHING NOT FORBIDDEN IS COMPULSORY" > -- T.H. White , * > The Once and Future King * > > On 1/19/2014 10:

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 20 January 2014 22:39, Russell Standish wrote: > The point about acting randomly is that clearly you are not optimising > your utility. You a choosing something other than the optimum action, > so are behaving irrationally by definition. Yet, it could be a > beneficial strategy to do so, for a

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Becoming can emerge from being, or at least it appeared to do so from the reel of film (or digital equivalent) I watched last night. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from

Re: A humble suggestion to the group

I at least have modified several of my views since being on this group (and FOAR). It generally takes a while, and involves lots of discussion, but it has happened. For example, I now have a greater belief that comp may be correct than when I was first introduced to it, when it seemed completely o

Re: Modal Logic (Part 1: Leibniz)

On 21 January 2014 08:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > If you remember Cantor, you see that if we take all variables into > account, the multiverse is already a continuum. OK? A world is defined by a > infinite sequence like "true, false, false, true, true, true, ..." > corresponding to p, q, r, p1,

Re: Modal Logic (Part 1: Leibniz)

On 21 January 2014 08:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Are the following laws? I don't put the last outer parenthesis for reason > of readability. > > p -> p > This is a law because p -> q is equivalent to (~p V q) and (p V ~p) must be (true OR false), or (false OR true) which are both true > > (p

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 21 January 2014 06:42, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/20/2014 1:11 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 20 January 2014 18:51, meekerdb wrote: > >> >> You seem not to appreciate that this dissipates the one essential >> advantage of mathematical monism: we understand mathematics

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 21 January 2014 06:48, meekerdb wrote: > > The love is not very apparent. Religionists here have opposed teaching > evolution, the big-bang, and the neural basis of mind. So far as I know > they have not objected to arithmetic. > > Give them time. Maybe nobody has told them that God invented

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 21 January 2014 06:28, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 3:50 PM, LizR wrote: > > >> I would buy the argument that mass murderer Charles Manson is the way >>> a bunch of particles obey the Schrodinger Wave Equation, but I'll be damned >>> it

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 21 January 2014 06:41, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/20/2014 1:09 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 20 January 2014 19:43, Russell Standish wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 10:13:22PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: >> > On 1/19/2014 7:09 PM, Russell Standish wrote: >> > &g

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

I am beginning to think that Russell is using a very narrow or perhaps formal definition of rationality, in which case perhaps objections that random (or unpredictable) behaviour can be rational don't fit it, even though most people think that such actions are at times the most rational choice. If

Re: The multiverse and the arrow of time - MWI experts please?

On 21 January 2014 14:18, Pierz wrote: > I am putting this out in order to clarify my understanding - hopefully the > MWI experts out there can help me out here. A while back I asked whether > the past can be undefined at a quantum level the way the future is. I asked > this because I recall (som

Re: A humble suggestion to the group

On 21 January 2014 12:49, Jason Resch wrote: > It looks like I need to update the database connection information: > > http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/ > > If others are interested, I will try to find time for that. I think as > useful as any page would be "Bio pages" of members, which state wh

Re: A humble suggestion to the group

On 21 January 2014 11:25, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/20/2014 11:18 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > There are obviously a lot of very intelligent members here who are well > read in modern science. I think everyone would agree with this. > > > Except for a few that are unfamiliar with relativity theory.

Re: The multiverse and the arrow of time - MWI experts please?

I'm not sure. Maybe when I've completely nutted out Brent's answer below it'll make sense, but it seems to me that a universe in thermodynamic equilibrium will still continue to diverge more than it merges, it's just that the different configurations of matter/energy will look much alike. In fact t

Re: what is the definition of computation?

A process which transforms information? Ultimately, digital computation comes down to the NAND operation, I'm told, which means it's a lot of "bit twiddling" which ultimately transforms one lots of bits into another. I guess versions with non-binary data (like DNA I assume?) can be reduced in princ

Re: On differentiation of "universes" in MWI

They talk about changes spreading out, perhaps gradually. ISTM that some changes aren't going to propagate very far or very fast. So the universe is full of bubbles in which there are a lot of local branches and I guess spaces in which they don't make enough difference to spread, or not much... Whi

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 21 January 2014 11:02, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > Did you take into consideration the rapid transition, enabled by the > projection machine, that made the appearance of motion appear? We have to > take all the details of the schemata into account. The movie did

Re: Tegmark's New Book

I scanned it ... I'm not sure if it mentions becoming and being, or does it? Could you point out any particularly relevant bits? On 21 January 2014 11:08, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > If you have a chance, scan through this paper. Its ideas follow the same >

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 21 January 2014 14:25, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/20/2014 5:00 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 21 January 2014 06:42, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/20/2014 1:11 AM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 20 January 2014 18:51, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> >>> You seem no

Re: On differentiation of "universes" in MWI

Yeah, I believe that's how it's supposed to work. They're all in the same background spacetime but once detangled have no influence on each other. (However a TOE might have something to say about "background spacetime") On 21 January 2014 16:45, Richard Ruquist wrote: > I prefer a theory where

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 22 January 2014 07:27, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Bruno, > > Again you avoid the question. You need to give everyone a clear and > convincing reason in English. > Excuse me while I pick myself up off the floor. Talk about pot and kettle! -- You received this message because you are subscribed

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 21 January 2014 17:51, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > Did the notion of an Eigenform, as defined, make sense to you? > > Heinz performs the magic trick of convincing us that the familiar objects > of our > existence can be seen to be nothing more than tokens

Re: First Ever Universe-Wide Cosmic Web Filaments Captured on Keck Observatory

Wow! Cool. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@

Re: A humble suggestion to the group

On 22 January 2014 10:02, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Spud, > > We could always ask Kip Thorne who is a of course a leading authority on > gravitation to judge. I'm just repeating what his book says. > > If anyone has the book Gravitation, Misner, Thorne and Wheeler explain > this on page 718. > I do

Re: Modal Logic (Part 1: Leibniz)

On 21 January 2014 22:29, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Oh! You did not answer: > > ((COLD & WET) -> ICE) -> ((COLD -> ICE) V (WET -> ICE)) > > So what? Afraid of the logician's trick? Or of the logician's madness? Try > this one if you are afraid to be influenced by your intuition aboutCOLD, > WET

Re: what is the definition of computation?

On 21 January 2014 17:22, Richard Ruquist wrote: > The notion that computation produces information contradicts the notion > that information is conserved > I suggested that computation *transforms* information, not *produces* it. Most logical operations lose information (NAND does, reducing two

Re: what is the definition of computation?

On 21 January 2014 22:44, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > Liz, Richard: > > I´m not talking about global reduction of entropy neither of the > universe neither a star, planet of black hole, but a local decrease of > entropy at the cost of a (bigger) increase of entropy in the > surroundings, so that t

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 22 January 2014 13:33, Russell Standish wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 02:32:23PM +1300, LizR wrote: > > I am beginning to think that Russell is using a very narrow or perhaps > > formal definition of rationality, in which case perhaps objections that > > random (or unp

Re: Discovery of quantum vibrations in brain microtubules confirms Hameroff/Penrose consciousness theory basis

On 22 January 2014 13:13, Russell Standish wrote: > I can concede that making a random choice amongst options of equal > and optimal utility could satisfy the definition of rational as a > borderline case, but I like the picture of Robby the robot saying > "that doesn't compute" and promptly blow

Re: On differentiation of "universes" in MWI

It seems to me that differentiation is local, and spreads slowly, and that there is always going to be some remerging (but only in proportion to the chances of entropy reversing). The an atom starts in a superposition of decayed and non-decayed. Now a cat is in a superposition of alive and dead. No

Re: A humble suggestion to the group

iirc Dark Matter was discovered around 1933 by measuring the velocities of galaxies in clusters. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li

Re: A humble suggestion to the group

On 22 January 2014 13:06, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > Didn't ask him about p-time... > > That's a shame. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 22 January 2014 11:38, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > Plain English explanations are the problem: they carry a set of > ontological assumptions built it. Kauffman is challenging these assumptions > and thus as to use a mixture of poetry and math to explain and elabo

Re: The multiverse and the arrow of time - MWI experts please?

On 22 January 2014 14:03, Russell Standish wrote: > What is ultimately mysterious is why observed reality is consistent > with us as observers - the occam catastrophe problem, I mention in > Do you mean consistent between us (i.e. it's mysterious that we agree on what we're observing) ? -- You

Re: Church thesis => non computable functions exist (Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 21 January 2014 08:49, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear Bruno, > > The idea that I am pursuing here is how to think of Becoming in a way > that is consistent with comp. So far all we have are eternal static > infinite entities. > Pigeon holes ... yes ... but they seem to make sense to me, eve

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >