On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Eventually you will have to answer the question of what is teleportable.
I have no doubt that someday matter can be transported, even information.
Even energy.
But the more important question to me is
On Sep 5, 2012, at 7:00 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
IMHO the burden to show that computers are alive and
have intelligence lies on the scientists.
I see no evidence of life or real intelligence
in computers.
Roger,
What is the difference between
On 07.09.2012 20:30 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if reality does not always obey the laws of logic?
On 07.09.2012 22:22 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
Consider the mental image that a person suffering from anorexia has
of themselves. It is distorted and false. How does this happen?
Consider the Placebo effect and its complement, the Nocebo effect.
Are they not examples
On 07 Sep 2012, at 12:24, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Aug 2012, at 21:57, benjayk wrote:
It seems that the Church-Turing thesis, that states that an
universal turing
machine can compute everything that is intuitively computable, has
near
universal acceptance among
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:24, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/7/2012 2:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
It is a recent suggestion, corroborated by the salvia reports and
experiences. I was used to agree with Brouwer that consciousness
and subjective time are not separable, like the 1p logic
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:39, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/7/2012 3:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But you claim that too, as matter is not primitive. or you lost me
again.
I need matter to communicate with you, but that matter is explained
in comp as a a persistent relational entity, so I
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Eventually you will have to answer the question of what is
teleportable.
I have no doubt that someday matter can be transported, even
information.
Even energy.
But the more important question to me is whether or not
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:49, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Although I don't follow Dawking's views on life and God,
I think his idea of semes, which are like genes but ideas instead,
is a very good one. If the logic follows through, then
man is the semes' way of propagating itself
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:53, Roger Clough wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
All-powerful does not mean unlawful.
Apparently all-powerful does mean worst than unlawful. It means that
0 = 1.
You might look at the book by Grim on the impossibility of
omniscience.
On 07 Sep 2012, at 14:19, benjayk wrote:
You always refer to studying some paper,
Always the same.
even though the paper actually
doesn't even begin to adress the question.
Which question? The paper mainly just formulate a question, shows how
comp makes it possible to translate the
On 07 Sep 2012, at 14:22, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Sep 2012, at 13:31, benjayk wrote:
Quantum effects beyond individual brains (suggested by psi) can't be
computed as well: No matter what I compute in my brain, this doesn't
entangle it with other brains since
On 07 Sep 2012, at 14:53, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Any time I use the word God, I always mean IMHO God.
I am actually thinking instead of Cosmic Intelligence
or Cosmnic Mind.
I try not to use that word (God) but sometimes forget.
I can see that. No problem if it is an
On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Racism ? How's that implied ?
Do you accept that your daughter marry a man who has undergone an
artificial brain transplant?
But I do agree that perception and Cs are
not understandable with materialistic concepts
at
On 07 Sep 2012, at 16:06, Roger Clough wrote:
Theres is some duplication in the propositions below which I have
not bothered
to clear up, sorry.
1) Mind, being inextended, is outside of the brain, which is
extended.
Mind (shared and the general, Platonia) is the subjective realm.
On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:45, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
What is UD ?
Universal Dovetailer.
Bruno
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/7/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content
On 07 Sep 2012, at 16:20, Roger Clough wrote:
There is a quote by Sherlock Holmes that suggests a way to possibly
filter out
solid truth from a comp (?)
List all of the possibilities or possible solutions. Then remove
all from that list
that are impossible (now or ever, I would add).
On 07 Sep 2012, at 17:11, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/7/2012 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Sep 2012, at 21:25, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:02:02 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
If you exclude space and time, what kind of locality do you refer
to?
On 07 Sep 2012, at 19:12, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7 2012, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
machines, even computers, IMHO in practice have no intellectual or
feeling facilities, are no more than dumb rocks.
Computers may or may not have feelings but that is of no concern to
On 08 Sep 2012, at 06:19, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/7/2012 8:43 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
Platonism (or mathematical realism) is the majority viewpoint of
modern mathematicians.
In a survey of mathematicians I know it is an even division. Of
course they are all methodological Platonists, but
Hi John Clark
God is outside of spacetime (in uncreated) , so your actions were imaginary.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: John Clark
Hi John Mikes
Here's the dilemma:
Unfortunately, any system -- with the exception of the oil-rich countries
(where fairness would seem to be hard to define) --
that is completely fair is unsustainable. Capitalism,
like it or not, is the only known way to increase a
country's wealth. Fairness
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 22:22 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
Consider the mental image that a person suffering from anorexia has
of themselves. It is distorted and false. How does this happen?
Consider the Placebo effect and its
On 9/8/2012 4:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:39, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/7/2012 3:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But you claim that too, as matter is not primitive. or you lost me
again.
I need matter to communicate with you, but that matter is explained
in comp as a
On 08.09.2012 12:35 Roger Clough said the following:
Hi John Mikes
Here's the dilemma:
Unfortunately, any system -- with the exception of the oil-rich
countries (where fairness would seem to be hard to define) -- that is
completely fair is unsustainable. Capitalism, like it or not, is the
only
Hi Roberto Szabo
You don't need much evolution to arrive at a being that can feel
and has at least some intellectual capacity. Any living
entity has to know friend from foe, pain from pleasure, and
so forth. But rocks, like computers, have no need for such abilities,
because they are both dead.
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind instead
of in the mirror just to better describe my experience). How could
you describe this phenomenon by means of res cogitans and
Hi Stephen P. King
I must be missing something.
Overlapping was just a rhetorical word since monads
are beyond spacetime.
Inextended beings such as mind don't need code to function.
Does a daisy run on code ?
Size and number do not seem to be to be limits for
monads to do what they do.
Hi Stephen P. King
OK I missed the intelligence issue.
Platonia spills out of the All, which is
intelligence itself. Since monads are operated
by the All, intelligence is not an issue.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
On 08 Sep 2012, at 12:45, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/8/2012 4:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Sep 2012, at 13:39, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/7/2012 3:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But you claim that too, as matter is not primitive. or you lost
me again.
I need matter to communicate
Hi Stephen P. King
He left out Spinoza and Leibniz, and didn't do a very good job on Descartes.
The inconsistencies
with Cartesian mind and body theory didn't bother the materialists, but
stimulated Leibniz to create his
Idealistic metaphysics, where mind and body are both mind, so no
Hi Stephen P. King
It is those problems with interactions between mind and body
that drove me to study Leibniz. Initially difficult, but
eventually self-teaching.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything
But Roger, capitalism can go both ways
as witnessed by the Great depression
and the Great Recession.
Richard
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi John Mikes
Here's the dilemma:
Unfortunately, any system -- with the exception of the oil-rich countries
Hi Jason Resch
IMHO life is essentially intelligence (mind), where intelligence is the ability
to make one's own choices,
not from software or hardware or anything in nature. I hypothesize that life is
undefinable because
to define it would limit its choices. Some limitation of course would be
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 6:36:26 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi John Mikes
Here's the dilemma:
Unfortunately, any system -- with the exception of the oil-rich countries
(where fairness would seem to be hard to define) --
that is completely fair is unsustainable. Capitalism,
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Pratt has no tools with which to understand subjectivity,
which is not objective . The objective world is all that materialism
believes exists. So dead in the water.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so
On 08 Sep 2012, at 12:35, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi John Mikes
Here's the dilemma:
Unfortunately, any system -- with the exception of the oil-rich
countries
(where fairness would seem to be hard to define) --
that is completely fair is unsustainable. Capitalism,
like it or not, is the only
On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind instead
of in the mirror just to better describe my experience). How could
you describe
Hi Bruno Marchal
They're close in mneaning, but a seme emphasizes meaning more than information(
a meme) I think.
Seme
(sem)
n.1.(Linguistics) A linguistic sign.
2.(Linguistics) A basic component of meaning of a morpheme, especially one
which cannot be decomposed into more basic components;
Hi Bruno Marchal
Apparently Grim has an argument somewhat similar to Godel's that there can be
no complete set of all truths
(that we can know, it doesn't mention God).
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that
Here I present another metaphor to encapsulate by view of the relation
between consciousness, information, and physicality by demonstrating the
inadequacy of functionalist, computationalist, and materialist models and
how they paint over the hard problem of consciousness with a choice of two
On 08.09.2012 14:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind
instead of in the mirror just to
Hi Bruno Marchal
Nobody has to believe anything I say.
I thought that was a given.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 14:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 6:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 12:37 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have
Hi Bruno Marchal
OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people
by the color of their skin. So you call me a racist.
You might be a liberal, because ironically and
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what
Bruno Marchal wrote:
even though the paper actually
doesn't even begin to adress the question.
Which question? The paper mainly just formulate a question, shows how
comp makes it possible to translate the question in math, and show
that the general shape of the possible solution is
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Sep 2012, at 14:22, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Sep 2012, at 13:31, benjayk wrote:
Quantum effects beyond individual brains (suggested by psi) can't be
computed as well: No matter what I compute in my brain, this doesn't
entangle it with
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) Mind is nonphysical, the nopnphysical by definition
is not extended.
2) The All in Platonia is the end-all and be-all of everything,
being to my mind Universal Intelligence, including human or computers.
So not just persons. All of existence swims in the All. Living and
Hi Bruno Marchal
IMHO Digital devices can interface with living systems,
but they must always ultimately be slaves to the self,
the nonphysical governor (mind), just as the supreme
monad (the All) is the governor of the universe. So transplant
of a physical brain seems a bit impossible as of
Hi Bruno Marchal
IMHO Sorry, perhaps I am growing tired and grumpy,
but the issue about about the lack of a T
Logical truth has its uses, but it has no provision for self or feelings or
indeed life, no meaning, no aesthetics, no morality, no intelligence,
just the gears of logic. No Bach,
Hi Bruno Marchal
Indeed, we are all sinners.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Indeed, we are all sinners.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time:
Hi Craig Weinberg
I seem to be a voice crying in the wilderness. So be it, but...
When you say Here I present , how or where does the I fit into your
philosophy ?
You cannot have thinking or consciousness or intelligence or perception withut
it.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
9/8/2012
I just respond to some parts of your posts, because I'd rather discuss the
main points than get sidetracked with issues that are less fundamental.
Jason Resch-2 wrote:
I admit that for numbers this is not so relevant because number relations
can be quite clearly expressed using numerous
As far as I see, we mostly agree on content.
I just can't make sense of reducing computation to emulability.
For me the intuitive sene of computation is much more rich than this.
But still, as I think about it, we can also create a model of computation
(in the sense of being intuitively
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is a visual illusion
created presumably by the brain. Don't you agree? Then it is
exactly a relationship between mental and physical states but not
2012/9/8 benjayk benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com
I just respond to some parts of your posts, because I'd rather discuss the
main points than get sidetracked with issues that are less fundamental.
Jason Resch-2 wrote:
I admit that for numbers this is not so relevant because number
On 9/8/2012 12:38 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 20:30 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.09.2012 21:03 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/6/2012 11:52 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
A too much powerful God leads to inconsistency.
What if
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno makes a valid point, that you attack only the weakest, most ill
conceived, notion(s) of God.
It is my habit to attack only the weakest parts of ideas, attacking the
strongest parts seems rather counterproductive
On 08.09.2012 18:10 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/8/2012 12:38 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 20:30 meekerdb said the following:
On 9/7/2012 1:11 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
This could work provided we could separate the world into
mental and physical states. The question
Consciousness isn't conceptual. It conceives but it isn't limited to
detached modalities of instruction. Consciousness is carnal and terrifying,
awe-inducing, excruciating, dull, silly. Concepts, semes, memes, are all
second order arrangements and modulations of directly experienced and
Does that mean there is no difference between maximizing sin and minimizing
it?
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 10:44:43 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Indeed, we are all sinners.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net javascript:
9/8/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no
On 9/8/2012 10:08 AM, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Sep 2012, at 14:22, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Sep 2012, at 13:31, benjayk wrote:
Quantum effects beyond individual brains (suggested by psi) can't be
computed as well: No matter what I compute in my brain,
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 9:34:45 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
because ironically and
paradoxically they see the world in terms of race.
Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never
saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought
the subject up.
Are you familiar with the KKK?
On 9/8/2012 11:34 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is a visual illusion
created presumably by the brain. Don't you agree? Then it is
exactly a
Cool. I think this shows how computation applies when water behaves like
objects (billiard balls) but does not apply when it remains in a fluid
state. Computation in this case relies on the superhydrophobic or
non-hydrophiliac state of water. The phobic-philiac distinction is not
trivial, as
On 08 Sep 2012, at 16:41, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Indeed, we are all sinners.
Hi Roger,
Saying this can only dilute the responsibility and helps the sinners.
I am not sure at all we are all sinners, unless you are using a so
weak sense that it is making every baby
On 08.09.2012 19:32 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 11:34 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 08.09.2012 15:27 Stephen P. King said the following:
On 9/8/2012 9:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say that the image in the mirror is a visual illusion
created presumably by the
On 08 Sep 2012, at 15:33, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people
by the color of their skin. So you call me a racist.
I was thinking only you might judge someone by the constitution of its
body.
You don't answer the question: can your
On Sep 8, 2012, at 7:09 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi Jason Resch
IMHO life is essentially intelligence (mind), where intelligence is
the ability to make one's own choices,
not from software or hardware or anything in nature.
Then from where do you suppose the choices
On 9/8/2012 10:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno makes a valid point, that
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 2:58 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 9/8/2012 10:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.comwrote:
Bruno makes a valid point, that
On 9/8/2012 3:58 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/8/2012 10:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Jason Resch
jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I found an example that quite clearly contradicts CT thesis, unless we
considerable weaken it (to something weaker than emulability).
The concept is rather simple. We introduce a meta-program that can,
additionally to computing what a normal program does, reflect upon the
states of program
Stephen,
You obviously haven't read and/or understood any of Langan's
papers...the least you could've done is spell his name correctly.
The apparent absence of a TOE notwithstanding, has any kind of
absolute knowledge ever been scientifically formulated? Yes, in the
form of logical
75 matches
Mail list logo
