Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 09:01, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 11:42 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got oppone

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 06:28, Jason Resch wrote: In the space of all possible movies, the ones that are watchable or meaningful to human viewers would all be highly compressible. The ones that are random snow, despite containing more information, would not make interesting movies. So maybe th

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 05:54, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 7:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, D

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:42, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 29 Dec 2013, at 22:51, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I go

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 11:42 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computation

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right, if

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:54 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 7:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/2013 2:08

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 7:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM,

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Dear Brent and Jason, > > I think that this is an important idea: the relationship between > compression algorithms and numbers. It does not look like a simple > one-to-one and onto map! > > Stephen, For a

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno March

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Brent and Jason, I think that this is an important idea: the relationship between compression algorithms and numbers. It does not look like a simple one-to-one and onto map! On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, D

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I g

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate > computationally a random number, an

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right, if we want generate only that numbers. but a simp

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right, if we want generate only that numbers. but a simple counting algorithm generating all num

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:19, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 3:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:36, Stephen Paul King wrote: I loath Kronecker's claim! It is synonymous to "Man is the measure of all things". What is his claim? I am not familiar with it. God created the

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:12, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 3:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Perhaps; but only for nano second. you real mind overlap on sequence of states, with the right probabilities, and for this you need the complete run of the UD, because your next "moment" is determioned b

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 18:43, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:34, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 19:31, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Computed how? By what? I know the answer to this one! To quote Brent -- "He

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 18:10, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 17:23, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, You might be able to theoretically simulate it but certainly not compute

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 17:43, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi LizR and Jason, Responding to both of you. I don't understand the claim of determinism is "random noise" is ne

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 17:35, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:56, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, "Any program, and whether or not it ever termina

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 17:30, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:39, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Jason, ISTM that the line " For each program we have generated that has not halted, execute one instruction

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 17:16, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Dec 2013, at 17:51, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Dec 2013, at 18:40, spudboy...@aol.com

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 16:51, Jason Resch wrote: On Dec 28, 2013, at 6:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:56, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, "Any program, and whether or not it ever terminates can be translated

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:35 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/28/2013 4:47 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:52 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 3:00 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:23 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/28/2013 4:47 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:52 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/28/2013 3:00 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:23 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:52 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/28/2013 3:00 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:23 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate >> computationally a rand

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/28/2013 3:00 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:23 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:23 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate > computationally a random number, and that is right, if we want generate > only that numbers. but a simple counting algorithm generati

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 29 December 2013 00:26, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 03:53, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > >> Would any "universal number do"? >> > > That is what Bruno speculatively has suggested. I am not so sure. > Sometimes I think an "if-then-else-statement" contains all that is > fundamentall

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/28/2013 4:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 17:23, Edgar L. Owen mailto:edgaro...@att.net>> wrote: Jason, You might be able to theoretically simulate it but certainly not compute it in real time which is what reality act

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right, if we want generate only that numbers. but a simple counting algorithm generating all numbers, 0, 1, 2, 6999500235148668, ... generat

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/28/2013 3:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:36, Stephen Paul King wrote: I loath Kronecker's claim! It is synonymous to "Man is the measure of all things". What is his claim? I am not familiar with it. God created the Integers, all else is the invention

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/28/2013 3:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Perhaps; but only for nano second. you real mind overlap on sequence of states, with the right probabilities, and for this you need the complete run of the UD, because your next "moment" is determioned by the FPI on all computations. That's a point t

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:34, LizR wrote: > > On 28 December 2013 19:31, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > >> Computed how? By what? >> > > I know the answer to this one! To quote Brent -- "He proposes to dispense > with any physica

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:34, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 19:31, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Computed how? By what? I know the answer to this one! To quote Brent -- "He proposes to dispense with any physical computation and have the UD exist via arithmetical realism as an abstract, immateri

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, LizR wrote: > > On 28 December 2013 17:23, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason, >> >> You might be able to theoretically simulate it but certainly not compute >> it in real time which is what reality ac

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:30, meekerdb wrote: On 12/27/2013 8:24 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi Edgar, But here is the thing. If we assume timelessness, Bruno is CORRECT! THe question then becomes: What is "time"? It's a computed partial ordering relation between events. The 1p time look

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:26, meekerdb wrote: He proposes to dispense with any physical computation and have the UD exist via arithmetical realism as an abstract, immaterial computation. What does a physicist? It looks outside, and seem to be believe in a special unique universal number, the

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Hi LizR and Jason, > > Responding to both of you. I don't understand the claim of determinism > is "random noise" is necessary for the computations. Turing machines > r

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:03, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > I ask this because I am studying Carl Hewitt's Actor Model... > > > Also know today as "object oriented" languages. c++ win against smaltalk, > which won against the Acto

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:35, Stephen Paul King wrote: An observer can only experience a "reality" that is not contradictory to its existence. Tell this to the dictators. Usually a reality guarantied some local consistency by definition of a reality (modeled by the notion of models in logic).

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:56, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Stephen Paul King < > stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > >> Hi Jason, >> >> "Any program, and whether or not it ever terminates can be

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:39, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Jason, > > ISTM that the line " For each program we have generated that has not > halted, execute one instruction of it for each (Program p in > listOfPrograms)" i

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 07:32, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 18:03, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, I would like to know the definition of "reality" that you are using here. I quite like "whatever doesn't go away when you stop believing in it." I quite like too. Bruno -- You re

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Bruno, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 27 Dec 2013, at 17:51, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Bruno, > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 25 Dec 2013, at 18:40, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: >> >> Are we not presuming, structur

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Dec 28, 2013, at 6:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:56, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, "Any program, and whether or not it ever terminates can be translated to a statement concerning numbers in arithmetic

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:53, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi LizR, This is fun! :-) We must remember that we are defining People as intersections of infinitely many computations. Right? This is a very loose way to talk. Computations are not sets, so "intersection of computations" is very ill

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:31, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi Jason, On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, "It is not a question of whether or not that binary string refers to anything that is true or n

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:31, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 17:27, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi LizR and Jason, Responding to both of you. I don't understand the claim of determinism is "random noise" is necessary for the computations. Turing machines require exact pre-specifiability. Add

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 17:23, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, You might be able to theoretically simulate it but certainly not compute it in real time which is what reality actually does which is my point. "In real time" ?! In comp (and many TOEs) time is

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:27, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi LizR and Jason, Responding to both of you. I don't understand the claim of determinism is "random noise" is necessary for the computations. Turing machines require exact pre-specifiability. Adding noise oracles is cheating! But it

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:06, LizR wrote: Clearly programmes don't have to be deterministic. They could contain a source of genuine randomness, in principle. I don't think the UD does, however. The UD emulates all quantum computer and many sort of non deterministic processes, including all r

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:03, Stephen Paul King wrote: I ask this because I am studying Carl Hewitt's Actor Model... Also know today as "object oriented" languages. c++ win against smaltalk, which won against the Actor model, but the idea is the same, basically. It is efficacious, but the mat

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 05:01, Stephen Paul King wrote: How do we distinguish a program from a string of random numbers. (Consider OTP encryptions). In which language? A program fortran will be distinguished by the grammar of Fortran. In some language all numbers will be program. Then , for a

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:56, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, "Any program, and whether or not it ever terminates can be translated to a statement concerning numbers in arithmetic. Thus mathematical truth captures the facts concerni

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:52, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Jason, ISTM that the line " For each program we have generated that has not halted, execute one instruction of it for each (Program p in listOfPrograms)" is buggy. It assu

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:44, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi Jason, "The first, second, 10th, 1,000,000th, and 10^100th, and 10^100^100th state of the UD's execution are mathematical facts ..." Umm, how? Godel and Matiyasevich would disagree! No logicians at all would ever disagree on this. The

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:39, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Jason, ISTM that the line " For each program we have generated that has not halted, execute one instruction of it for each (Program p in listOfPrograms)" is buggy. It assumes that the space of "programs that do not halt" is acce

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:41, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:20 PM, LizR wrote: There is one point to add which I think you've missed, Jason (apologies if I've misunderstood). The UD generates the first instruction of the first programme, then the first instruction of the s

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 04:36, Stephen Paul King wrote: I loath Kronecker's claim! It is synonymous to "Man is the measure of all things". What is his claim? I am not familiar with it. God created the Integers, all else is the invention of man. "man is a measure of all things" is a quot

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 03:29, LizR wrote: What I think Jason is saying is that the TRACE of the UD (knowns as UD* - I made the same mistake!) Good :) will eventually contain your mind. Perhaps; but only for nano second. you real mind overlap on sequence of states, with the right probabi

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 02:04, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 13:56, Jason Resch wrote: The UDA is a comparatively short program, and provably contains the program that is identical to your mind. To be more precise (I hope) - assuming that thoughts, experiences etc are a form of computation

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 02:03, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, You state "The UD is a comparatively short program, and provably contains the program that is identical to your mind." You can't be serious! As stated that's the most ridiculous statement I've heard here today in all manner of respect

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 01:56, Jason Resch wrote: Somewhat. I think how frequently a program is referenced / instantiated by other non-halting programs may play a role. Yes. It has to be like that. Stopping programs should contribute to 0, in the "measure conflict". So we are (m

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 Dec 2013, at 00:20, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 6:03 PM, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 11:55, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi LizR, That is what is not explicitly explained! I could see how one might make an argument based on Godel numbers and a choice of a num

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 27 Dec 2013, at 23:50, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 05:51, Stephen Paul King > wrote: It has always seemed to me that UDA cannot solve the mind-body problem strictly because it cannot comprehend the existence of "other minds". Actually, I have wondered about this. How do all these

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 27 Dec 2013, at 17:51, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Dec 2013, at 18:40, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Are we not presuming, structure, or a-priori, existence of something, doing this processing, this work? In the U

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Hi Brent, How "long do we have to wait" of the "generations" to "run" when time isn't an allowed concept? In Platonia there is no time, therefore no arguments that imply the necessary existence of time are allowed. On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:40 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/27/2013 8:37 PM, St

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:14 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jason, >>> >>> I wou

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/27/2013 8:37 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: Why do "real world" computers use noise oracles, or their equivalent? Because for some problems it is quick and easy to check a proposed solution, but difficult to calculate one. So you generate proposed solutions at random until one of them che

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 19:34, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/27/2013 8:32 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 28 December 2013 17:27, Jason Resch wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: >> >>> If it is Markov, the BB problem automatically follows. >>

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/27/2013 8:32 PM, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 17:27, Jason Resch > wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Stephen Paul King mailto:stephe...@provensecure.com>> wrote: If it is Markov, the BB problem automatically follows. "BB = Boltzmann

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Right. That is why the word "incontrovertible" is included. One's opinions and desires, etc. con't matter a hill of beans to what is necessarily true for come collection of (multiple!) observers. I also assume a version of the anthropic principle: An observer can only experience a "reality" that is

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 19:31, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Computed how? By what? > I know the answer to this one! To quote Brent -- "He proposes to dispense with any physical computation and have the UD exist via arithmetical realism as an abstract, immaterial computation." -- You received this mes

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 18:03, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Hi Jason, > > I would like to know the definition of "reality" that you are using here. > I quite like "whatever doesn't go away when you stop believing in it." -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/27/2013 8:24 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: Hi Edgar, But here is the thing. If we assume timelessness, Bruno is CORRECT! THe question then becomes: What is "time"? It's a computed partial ordering relation between events. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Computed how? By what? On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:30 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/27/2013 8:24 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Hi Edgar, > >But here is the thing. If we assume timelessness, Bruno is CORRECT! > THe question then becomes: What is "time"? > > > It's a computed partial orderin

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/27/2013 8:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Let me point out one fatal problem with Bruno's theory as you present it. According to you there is some single processor that runs all this UD stuff, but the truth is that in actual computational reality every logical element What is a "log

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Hi Brent, What is "executing" it? On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:13 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/27/2013 7:54 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 28 December 2013 16:44, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > >> Hi Jason, >> >> "The first, second, 10th, 1,000,000th, and 10^100th, and 10^100^100th >> state of the UD's

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/27/2013 7:54 PM, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 16:44, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi Jason, "The first, second, 10th, 1,000,000th, and 10^100th, and 10^100^100th state of the UD's execution are mathematical facts ..." Umm, how? Godel and Ma

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Hi Jason, On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:14 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Stephen Paul King < > stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > >> Hi Jason, >> >> I would like to know the definition of "reality" that you are using >> here. >> > > Reality I normally define

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > I would like to know the definition of "reality" that you are using > here. > Reality I normally define as "that which exists". > Here is mine: *That which is incontrovertible for some col

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Hi Jason, I would like to know the definition of "reality" that you are using here. Here is mine: *That which is incontrovertible for some collection of observers that can communicate*. This definition requires interactions and thus requires some form of primitive becoming. Platonia does not cha

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Hi LizR, > > This is fun! :-) We must remember that we are defining People as > intersections of infinitely many computations. Right? Their perceptions of > themselves as physical being having some particu

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

http://kauffman2013.wordpress.com/ :-) On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:51 PM, LizR wrote: > On 28 December 2013 17:47, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > >> Loops are sometimes allowed as outputs of computations. :-) >> > > I think we came out one turn higher on the spiral staircase. > > -- > You receiv

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Hi LizR, This is fun! :-) We must remember that we are defining People as intersections of infinitely many computations. Right? Their perceptions of themselves as physical being having some particular set of configuration, for example bilateral symmetry, etc. is not really relevant to UDA. So, i

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:31 PM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jason, >>> >>> "It i

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 17:47, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Loops are sometimes allowed as outputs of computations. :-) > I think we came out one turn higher on the spiral staircase. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 17:47, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Yeah, it is! Its about how one computer's noise is another computer's > signal! > It throws SETI into a loop too. How can we detect encrypted signals from the stars? They'll look like noise! -- You received this message because you are subsc

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 17:46, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Ah, but they do degrade. Consider your ability to access a '80s floppy > drive's data. > > Well, that's because people haven't worked out how to do it perfectly. I agree digital archaeology is a real problem, but so would analogue be without th

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Loops are sometimes allowed as outputs of computations. :-) On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:46 PM, LizR wrote: > On 28 December 2013 17:45, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > >> That is the question, isn't it! >> >> I think this thread just disappeared into its own Ouroboros... > >> >> On Fri, Dec 27, 20

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 28 December 2013 17:45, Stephen Paul King wrote: > That is the question, isn't it! > > I think this thread just disappeared into its own Ouroboros... > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:42 PM, LizR wrote: > >> On 28 December 2013 17:38, Stephen Paul King >> wrote: >> >>> "Anything that emulates a

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Yeah, it is! Its about how one computer's noise is another computer's signal! On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:45 PM, LizR wrote: > On 28 December 2013 17:44, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > >> I have studied encryptions. My mind is still recovering from reading the >> Stay and Vicary paper! (It shows

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Ah, but they do degrade. Consider your ability to access a '80s floppy drive's data. On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:44 PM, LizR wrote: > On 28 December 2013 17:41, Jason Resch wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi LizR and

  1   2   3   >