Re: Are conscious beings always fallible?

2004-01-20 Thread Eric Hawthorne
How would they ever know that I wonder? Well let's see. I'm conscious and I'm not fallible. Therefore ;-) David Barrett-Lennard wrote: I'm wondering whether the following demonstrates that a computer that can only generate thoughts which are sentences derivable from some underlying axioms

Re: Are conscious beings always fallible?

2004-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
I agree with you. Actually you can use the second recursion theorem of Kleene to collapse all the orders. This is easier in an untyped programming language like (pure) LISP than in a typed language, although some typed language have a primitive for handling untyped self-reference, like the

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Stephen, At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Hal, and Friends, Were and when is the consideration of the physical resources required for the computation going to obtain? Is my question equivalent to the old first cause question? This is a good question for a

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Bruno, Interleaving. - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 5:55 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable Dear Stephen, At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Hal, and Friends,

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Hal Finney
At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Where and when is the consideration of the physical resources required for the computation going to obtain? Is my question equivalent to the old first cause question? Anything physical is by definition within a universe (by my definition,

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Hal, A theorem doesn't weigh anything, and neither does a computation. Nice try but that is a very smelly Red Herring. Even Conway's Life can not exist, even in the abstract sense, without some association with the possibility of being implemented and it is this Implementation that

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
The fact that an Algorithm is independent of any particular implementation is not reducible to the idea that Algorithms (or Numbers, or White Rabbits, etc.) can exist without some REAL resources being used in their implementation (and maybe some kind of thermodynamics). To paraphrase

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Pete Carlton
The following thought experiment might provoke some intuitions on this question.. Imagine a Life universe that contains, among other things, two SASes talking to each other (and showing each other pictures, and in general having a very lucid, conscious, conversation.) Imagine that instead of

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear CMR, - Original Message - From: CMR [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 5:19 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable [SPK previous] The fact that an Algorithm is independent of any particular implementation is not reducible to the

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Hal Finney
Pete Carlton writes: Imagine a Life universe that contains, among other things, two SASes talking to each other (and showing each other pictures, and in general having a very lucid, conscious, conversation.) Imagine that instead of being implemented on a computer, it's implemented by a

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
Greetings Stephen, BTW, have you ever read about the Maxwell Demon? Being partial to the information physical view; not only have I read it, I also account for it by viewing a system's information as physical. So by inference should then I be viewing the mapping of the intra and extra universal

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
Greetings Pete, If not, then can you say what it is about the active process of flipping or laying down that counts as computation but does not count when the stack is a static block? I suppose I'm ultimately in the hard info physics camp, in that the pattern's the thing; given the 2ds and

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Hal Finney
CMR writes: Then question then becomes, I suppose, if in fact our universe is a digital one (if not strictly a CA) havng self-consistent emergent physics, then might it not follow that it is implemented (run?) via some extra-universal physical processes that only indirectly correspond to ours?

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear CMR, - Original Message - From: CMR [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 6:46 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? Greetings Stephen, BTW, have you ever read about the Maxwell Demon? Being partial to the information physical view; not

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Hal, Consider the last two paragraphs from one of Stephen Wolfram's papers: http://www.stephenwolfram.com/publications/articles/physics/85-undecidability/2/text.html *** Quantum and statistical mechanics involve sums over possibly infinite sets of configurations in systems. To derive

RE: Are conscious beings always fallible?

2004-01-20 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
Even if we utilize a language with reflection capability, do we still have an underlying problem with different levels of mathematical truth as indicated by the question of whether 3+4 equals 7? When an expression contains a sub-expression, don't we expect to be able to replace that

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
Does this help... Let f(x) be a predicate on positive integer x. Let pn = |{ x = n | f(x) }| / n (ie the fraction of the first n positive integers that satisfy the predicate) I propose that we define the probability of f as P(f) = p if pn converges to p. This allows us to say the

Modern Physical theory as a basis for Ethical and Existential Nihilism

2004-01-20 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am writing my high school senior project term paper on defending ethical and existential nihilism based on quantum and multiverse theory. I was looking for any comments on the subject. Here I place my outline for said paper: --- A

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/19/04, Hal Finney wrote: However, here is an alternate formulation of my argument which seems to be roughly equivalent and which avoids this objection: create a random program tape by flipping a coin for each bit. Now the probability that you created the first program above is 1/2^100, and

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Jesse Mazer
Kory Heath wrote: At 1/19/04, Hal Finney wrote: However, here is an alternate formulation of my argument which seems to be roughly equivalent and which avoids this objection: create a random program tape by flipping a coin for each bit. Now the probability that you created the first program above

Re: Modern Physical theory as a basis for Ethical and Existential Nihilism

2004-01-20 Thread Eric Hawthorne
Sorry. Can't help myself : Is there any point in completing that term paper really? On a few points. I don't believe in the point of view of nihilism because everything will happen in the multiverse, anyway, regardless of what I do.. My reasons are a little vague, but here's a stab at it: 1.

Re: Modern Physical theory as a basis for Ethical and Existential Nihilism

2004-01-20 Thread Norman Samish
Your conclusion that there is no scientific justification for morals of any sort, only that in the Darwinistic sense depends on the definition of scientific. Without morals an argument could be made that mankind would not exist - it would have self-destructed. Perhaps that is scientific

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
Kory said... At 1/21/04, David Barrett-Lennard wrote: This allows us to say the probability that an integer is even is 0.5, or the probability that an integer is a perfect square is 0. But can't you use this same logic to show that the cardinality of the even integers is half that of the

Re: [issues] Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread James N Rose
Calm, Steve, calm. :-) Remember my comment the other evening: It is the appropriate moment in human thought to change the definitions of 'objective' and 'subjective'. Implementation is the 'subjective'. Relationship need not be. In fact, relationship is necessarily -intangible-, but -is-

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
Think of it this way, what is the cardinality of the equivalence class of representations R of, say, a 1972 Jaguar XKE, varying over *all possible languages* and *symbol systems*? I think it is at least equal to the Reals. Is this correct? If R has more than one member, how can we

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
And what does it say about the physical properties which are necessary for computation? We have energy; Life has blinkiness (the degree to which cells are blinking on and off within a structure); neither property has a good analog in the other universe. Does the real universe win, in terms