Hi Bruno.
I have sent it to you.
The key to the paper is that it should be regarded as an engineering
document. I am embarked on building a real AGI using the real physical
world of components in an act of science. Based on being inspired and
guided by neuroscience, I have identified two
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:45:56AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I realize I have been clear on this in some FOR list post, perhaps
not here. I don't think I have varied on this. To be conscious, you
need only to be universal.
I have heard of universality being argued to be necessary (to
Hi Russell,
Do you have any further thoughts on my idea that entanglement and
gravity are linked together? I really believe that this is the
solution to the EPR paradox and the black hole information paradox,
but I haven't heard any qualified opinion on the subject yet.
Thank you!
F.H.
On 11 Jun 2011, at 10:10, Russell Standish wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:45:56AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I realize I have been clear on this in some FOR list post, perhaps
not here. I don't think I have varied on this. To be conscious, you
need only to be universal.
I have heard of
Hi Colin,
I have sent it to you.
Thanks.
The key to the paper is that it should be regarded as an engineering
document. I am embarked on building a real AGI using the real
physical world of components in an act of science.
OK. Although, as you know, (or should know) the real
Instrumentalism, anyone?
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.12395,y.2011,no.3,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx
The range of phenomena physics has explained is more than impressive;
it underlies the whole of modern civilization. Nevertheless, as a
physicist travels along his (in
Hi Bruno,
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Actually, comp prevents
artificial intelligence. This does not prevent the existence, and
even the apparition, of intelligent machines. But this might happen
*despite* humans, instead of 'thanks to the humans'.
This sounds really strange. So if we
On 6/11/2011 1:20 AM, Felix Hoenikker wrote:
Hi Russell,
Do you have any further thoughts on my idea that entanglement and
gravity are linked together? I really believe that this is the
solution to the EPR paradox and the black hole information paradox,
but I haven't heard any qualified opinion
On 11 Jun 2011, at 19:03, benjayk wrote:
Hi Bruno,
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Actually, comp prevents
artificial intelligence. This does not prevent the existence, and
even the apparition, of intelligent machines. But this might happen
*despite* humans, instead of 'thanks to the humans'.
This
On 6/11/2011 7:51 AM, Rex Allen wrote:
Instrumentalism, anyone?
I'll have a helping. And I'll also note that instrumentalism with a
pinch of common sense is as good as it gets.
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.12395,y.2011,no.3,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx
The
On 11 Jun 2011, at 16:51, Rex Allen wrote:
Instrumentalism, anyone?
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.12395,y.2011,no.3,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx
The range of phenomena physics has explained is more than impressive;
it underlies the whole of modern civilization.
On 6/11/2011 12:41 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11 Jun 2011, at 19:03, benjayk wrote:
Hi Bruno,
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Actually, comp prevents
artificial intelligence. This does not prevent the existence, and
even the apparition, of intelligent machines. But this might happen
*despite*
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 3:55 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/11/2011 7:51 AM, Rex Allen wrote:
Instrumentalism, anyone?
I'll have a helping. And I'll also note that instrumentalism with a pinch
of common sense is as good as it gets.
Common sense? What is this common sense
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 11 Jun 2011, at 16:51, Rex Allen wrote:
Instrumentalism, anyone?
It is not because a theology fails that we have to abandon all theologies.
That would lead indeed to instrumentalism, and this would kill all
14 matches
Mail list logo
