Re: Little exercise

Le 18-nov.-08, à 18:31, A. Wolf a écrit : > >> i am not sure I understand. Are you thinking that the hero is in its >> own simulation? > > No. The tape isn't a standard Turing tape because it's infinitely > long. :) ? > That's why someone can't perform the calculation stepwise in the way

Re: MGA 1

Le 19-nov.-08, à 07:13, Russell Standish a écrit : > I think Alice was indeed not a zombie, I think you are right. COMP + MAT implies Alice (in this setting) is not a zombie. > and that her consciousness > supervened on the physical activity stimulating her output gates (the > cosmic explo

Re: QTI & euthanasia (brouillon)

*So you're saying that a "physics extracted from mechanism" which (let's assume) refutes mechanism, leads inescapably to a mathematical structure in logic-space which actually constitutes the "physical" universe. And thus we can justify and explain the physical laws without any reference to m

Re: MGA 1

Bruno, > If no one objects, I will present MGA 2 (soon). I also agree completely and am curious to see where this is going. Please continue! Cheers, Telmo Menezes. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "

Re: MGA 1

Bruno:      I'm intested to see the second part. Thanks! --- On Wed, 11/19/08, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: MGA 1 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, November 19, 2008, 3:59 AM Le 19-nov.-08, à 07:13, Russell Standish a écrit :

Re: MGA 1

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:59 AM, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Does everyone accept, like Russell, that, assuming COMP and MAT, Alice > is not a zombie? I mean, is there someone who object? Remember we are > proving implication/ MAT+MECH => . We never try to argue > about that p

Re: MGA 1

To add some clarification, I do not think spreading Alice's logic gates across a field and allowing cosmic rays to cause each gate to perform the same computations that they would had they existed in her functioning brain would be conscious. I think this because in isolation the logic gates are no

Re: QTI & euthanasia (brouillon)

On 19 Nov 2008, at 16:01, m.a. wrote: > So you're saying that a "physics extracted from mechanism" which > (let's assume) refutes mechanism, If a physics extracted from mechanism refutes mechanism, then mechanism is refuted. (p implies not p) is equivalent with (not p). I guess you meant "

Re: MGA 1

Are not logic gates black boxes, though? Does it really matter what happens between Input and Output? In which case, it has absolutely no bearing on Alice's consciousness whether the gate's a neuron, an electronic doodah, a team of well-trained monkeys or a lucky quantum event or synchronicity. It

Re: MGA 1

On 19 Nov 2008, at 20:17, Jason Resch wrote: > To add some clarification, I do not think spreading Alice's logic > gates across a field and allowing cosmic rays to cause each gate to > perform the same computations that they would had they existed in > her functioning brain would be conscio

Re: QTI & euthanasia (brouillon)

Bruno, I was just quoting you: "And if you do the math, you get a physics extracted from mechanism, and you can use it to confirm mechanism or to refute it." Did you mean "refutes materialism"? Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2008, at 16:01, m.a. wrote: > >> *So you're saying tha

MGA 1 bis (exercise)

On 19 Nov 2008, at 16:06, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Bruno, > >> If no one objects, I will present MGA 2 (soon). > > I also agree completely and am curious to see where this is going. > Please continue! Thanks Telmo, thanks also to Gordon. I will try to send MGA 2 asap. But this asks me some t

Re: MGA 1 bis (exercise)

Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2008, at 16:06, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > >> Bruno, >> >>> If no one objects, I will present MGA 2 (soon). >> I also agree completely and am curious to see where this is going. >> Please continue! > > > Thanks Telmo, thanks also to Gordon. > > I will try to

Re: MGA 1

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2008, at 20:17, Jason Resch wrote: > > To add some clarification, I do not think spreading Alice's logic gates > across a field and allowing cosmic rays to cause each gate to perform the > same computations tha

Re: MGA 1

Jason Resch wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > On 19 Nov 2008, at 20:17, Jason Resch wrote: > >> To add some clarification, I do not think spreading Alice's logic >> gates across a field and al

Re: MGA 1 bis (exercise)

> Could you alter the so-lucky cosmic explosion beam a little bit so > that Alice still succeed her math exam, but is, reasonably enough, a > zombie during the exam. With zombie taken in the traditional sense of > Kory and Dennett. > Of course you have to keep well *both* MECH *and* MAT. I thin

Re: Little exercise

>> No. The tape isn't a standard Turing tape because it's >> infinitely long. :) > > ? You're presuming the Universe contains finite data. Most cosmological evidence suggests that the Universe is flat and unbounded, which implies it would be infinite in size. If space is not quantized (whic

Re: Little exercise

Hi, 2008/11/20 A. Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >>> No. The tape isn't a standard Turing tape because it's >>> infinitely long. :) >> >> ? > > You're presuming the Universe contains finite data. Most cosmological > evidence suggests that the Universe is flat and unbounded, which implies it > wou

Re: Little exercise

> Well if you take any finite portion of the universe then you have a > finite amount of matter, this finite amount of matter has a finite set > of possible permutations hence for a given block of universes of the > same size there is only a finite set of possible arrangement of the > matter in th

Re: MGA 1

On Nov 18, 2008, at 11:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > The last question (of MGA 1) is: was Alice, in this case, a zombie > during the exam? Of course, my personal answer would take into account the fact that I already have a problem with the materialist's idea of "matter". But I think we're

Re: QTI & euthanasia (brouillon)

On Nov 16, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Günther Greindl wrote: > nicely put (the below), it captures my current metaphysical position > quite accurately :-) Thanks, Günther! It'll be interesting to see if we continue to agree as the MGA thread progresses. :) -- Kory --~--~-~--~~---