Thank you for this remark, Hal. Indeed, you mentioned very similar
ideas:
List of all properties: The list of all possible properties
objects can have. The list can not be empty since there is at least
one object: A Nothing. A Nothing has at least one property -
emptiness. The list is most
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 03:13:09PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 14-sept.-07, à 01:02, Russell Standish a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:04:34PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 13-sept.-07, à 00:48, Russell Standish a écrit :
These sorts of discussions No-justification,
Just a further comment - Youness asked me about his properties
idea. For me a property is something that belongs to the semantic
level, not the syntactic one. It is something that distinguishes one
subset of the ensemble from another. This later ends up being the
results of projections in a
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 01:25:04PM -, Rolf Nelson wrote:
If I understand the Measure Problem correctly, we wonder why we find
ourselves in a Goldilocks Universe of stars and galaxies rather than
a simpler universe consisting solely of blackbody radiation, or a more
complex,
Le 17-sept.-07, à 08:22, Youness Ayaita a écrit :
Thank you for this remark, Hal. Indeed, you mentioned very similar
ideas:
List of all properties: The list of all possible properties
objects can have. The list can not be empty since there is at least
one object: A Nothing. A Nothing
Le 17-sept.-07, à 08:51, Russell Standish a écrit :
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 03:13:09PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 14-sept.-07, à 01:02, Russell Standish a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:04:34PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 13-sept.-07, à 00:48, Russell Standish a écrit :
These
John Mikes skrev:
1.- Q: What are light and fermions?
A:
Light is a fluctuation of closed strings of arbitrary sizes.
Fermions are ends of open strings.
2.- Q: Where do light and fermions come from?
A:
Light and fermions come from the collective motions of string-like
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:36:51PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
It doesn't matter. The most interesting ones, however, have inverse
images of non-zero measure. ie \forall n \in N, the set
O^{-1}(n) = {x: O(x)=n}
is of nonzero measure.
I have no clue of what you are saying here.
Le 15-sept.-07, à 15:25, Rolf Nelson a écrit :
If I understand the Measure Problem correctly, we wonder why we find
ourselves in a Goldilocks Universe of stars and galaxies rather than
a simpler universe consisting solely of blackbody radiation, or a more
complex, unpredictable Harry Potter
Torgny, thanks for your explanations...Let me interject
John
On 9/17/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Mikes skrev:
- 1.- Q: *What are light and fermions?*
- A: Light is a fluctuation of closed strings of arbitrary sizes.
Fermions are ends of open strings.
-
World-Index-Compression Postulate: The most probable way for the
output of a random UTM program to be a single qualia, is through
having a part of the program calculate a Universe, U, that is similar
to the universe we currently are observing; and then having another
part of the program
and would get angry if I punched it
I meant to say, would punch me back if I punched it. It's begging
the question for the search algorithm to know whether the internal
mental state is angry.
-Rolf
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
The considerations trying to solve the measure problem have not been
that primitive, but much better. The concept of a cubic meter won't
make sense in most of the universes, and to compare infinities in a
rigorous manner is nothing new to mathematicians. Both, Standish and
Schmidhuber (and
Hi Youness:
Bruno has indeed recommended that I study in more detail the
underlying mathematics that I may be appealing to. The response that
I have made may be a bit self serving but at this point in my life I
am having difficultly adding yet another area of skill to my resume.
This
On Sep 13, 11:47 pm, Youness Ayaita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see two perfectly equivalent ways to define a property. This is
somehow analogous to the mathematical definition of a function f: Of
course, in order to practically decide which image f(x) is assigned to
a preimage x, we
On Sep 18, 1:24 pm, Hal Ruhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Youness:
Bruno has indeed recommended that I study in more detail the
underlying mathematics that I may be appealing to. The response that
I have made may be a bit self serving but at this point in my life I
am having difficultly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 13, 11:47 pm, Youness Ayaita [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see two perfectly equivalent ways to define a property. This is
somehow analogous to the mathematical definition of a function f: Of
course, in order to practically decide which image f(x) is
17 matches
Mail list logo