Re: Numbers in Leibniz

2012-10-29 Thread Stephen P. King
On 10/29/2012 1:15 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Still waiting for the storm to shut things down. Numbers are not discussed specifically as far as I can find yet, in my books on Leibniz. Which probably means that they are simply numbers, with no ontological status. Sort of like space or

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 18:51, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Predicting the weather is hard, but in principle possible. Quantum indeterminacy probably comes into play in long range weather predictions, but even if the world was as deterministic

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 18:23, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: I am not sure if you are being consistent here. Earlier you said you said you identify yourself with a stream of thoughts Obviously. If you are identified with a stream of

Re: Code length = probability distribution

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 20:41, meekerdb wrote: On 10/28/2012 8:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Oct 2012, at 21:35, meekerdb wrote: On 10/27/2012 7:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Oct 2012, at 21:30, meekerdb wrote: On 10/26/2012 6:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Oh yes, I remember that

Re: wave function collapse

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Richard, On 28 Oct 2012, at 21:01, Richard Ruquist wrote: Bruno, But it seems that the Gleason Theorem assigns probabilities to the different universes in the multiverse that are not there in Everett's MWI in the first place. Richard ? I don't see that, nor why you say so. can you

Re: Code length = probability distribution

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 21:14, meekerdb wrote: On 10/28/2012 10:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Oct 2012, at 00:19, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 05:13:50PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: Oh yes, I remember that you did agree once with the 323 principle, but I forget what is

Re: A mirror of the universe.

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 23:11, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/28/2012 10:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Oct 2012, at 17:02, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/27/2012 10:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Oct 2012, at 20:30, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/26/2012 8:44 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Dear

Re: Hurricane

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 23:21, Roger Clough wrote: Hi everything-list If things go as expected, meaning that the power goes off, I may be offline for a couple of days. Washington DC is just about to be hit by a hurricane. Good luck. Take care. Be cautious. Bruno Roger Clough,

Re: A mirror of the universe.

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Oct 2012, at 23:31, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal I still haven't sorted the issue of numbers out. I suppose I ought to do some research in my Leibniz books. That's OK, but eventually you have to look inward, and see what you think. the solution is in your head, even if

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: We now know that computing or thinking is physical, We don't know that. We know that as well as we know anything about physics. We deduce that in the Aristotelian's theories. I have no idea what if anything that means. it

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Gödel and Turing have never touch on the first and third person issue. Perhaps because they knew that neither they nor anybody else had anything interesting to add to the subject and they had better things to do with their time.

Re: wave function collapse

2012-10-29 Thread Richard Ruquist
Bruno, I do not find Deutsch's introduction of a rational decision maker convincing e.g.: http://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/9906015.pdf nor Wallaces elaboration on that theme e.g.: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0906.2718v1.pdf. My belief is that a rational decision maker, somewhat like a god,

Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

2012-10-29 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Stathis Papaioannou Building more complex structures out of simpler ones by a simple set of rules (or any set of rules) seems to violate the second law of thermodynamics. Do you have a way around the second law ? What you are proposing seems to be goal-directed behavior by the gods of

Re: mega-consciousness,created by bio-electrical circuitry?

2012-10-29 Thread Roger Clough
Hi meekerdb How about social justice for zombies ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/29/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: EveryThing Time: 2012-10-27, 15:59:03 Subject:

Re: Numbers in Leibniz

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Oct 2012, at 06:15, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Still waiting for the storm to shut things down. Take care. Numbers are not discussed specifically as far as I can find yet, in my books on Leibniz. Which probably means that they are simply numbers, with no ontological status.

Re: Re: A mirror of the universe.

2012-10-29 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal OK, let's suppose that the numbers can be considered as ideas in the mind of the One or the Supreme monad, which is the monad for the universe. Then the universe would be the corporeal body. Or something like that. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/29/2012 Forever is a

Re: Numbers in Leibniz

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Oct 2012, at 14:36, Stephen P. King wrote: So numbers are universal and can be treated mathematically as always. I agree, but the concept of numbers has no meaning prior to the existence of objects that can be counted. To think otherwise is equivalent to claiming that

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Oct 2012, at 17:03, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: We now know that computing or thinking is physical, We don't know that. We know that as well as we know anything about physics. This is not valid. A priori we can be dreaming in

Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 Agreed, we cannot demonstrate that in principle, as a matter of logic, mathematical modeling must inevitably be a distortion of what is modeled, although models actually constructed

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Oct 2012, at 17:10, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Gödel and Turing have never touch on the first and third person issue. Perhaps because they knew that neither they nor anybody else had anything interesting to add to the subject and

Re: mega-consciousness,created by bio-electrical circuitry?

2012-10-29 Thread meekerdb
On 10/29/2012 9:25 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb How about social justice for zombies ? We already have it, since philosophical zombies are indistinguishable from other people. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group.

Re: A mirror of the universe.

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Oct 2012, at 17:34, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal OK, let's suppose that the numbers can be considered as ideas in the mind of the One or the Supreme monad, which is the monad for the universe. Then the universe would be the corporeal body. Or something like that. Hmm... I

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: We know that as well as we know anything about physics This is not valid. NOT A VALID POINT?! A priori we can be dreaming in some world based on a different physics. Or, as with comp we might belong only to

Re: wave function collapse

2012-10-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
Richard, Bruno, I do not find Deutsch's introduction of a rational decision maker convincing e.g.: http://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/9906015.pdf nor Wallaces elaboration on that theme e.g.: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0906.2718v1.pdf. My belief is that a rational decision maker, somewhat

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread meekerdb
On 10/29/2012 10:21 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 Agreed, we cannot demonstrate that in principle, as a matter of logic, mathematical modeling must inevitably be a distortion of what is

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
On 29.10.2012 19:21 meekerdb said the following: On 10/29/2012 10:21 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 Agreed, we cannot demonstrate that in principle, as a matter of logic, mathematical

Re: Re: A mirror of the universe.

2012-10-29 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal I think you're right. Anyway, I've since decided that the numbers have to be simply a priori. Like the pre-established (a priori) Harmony. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/29/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi Science cannot give us the absolute truth because the foundation on which science rests is contingent. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/29/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From:

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread meekerdb
On 10/29/2012 11:33 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 29.10.2012 19:21 meekerdb said the following: On 10/29/2012 10:21 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Some more quotes from From Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective by Bas C Van Fraassen. p. 45 Agreed, we cannot demonstrate that in

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread John Mikes
Brent, I think if a 'model' is *complete*, it is not a model, it is the real thing. Consequently it (as the real thing) is not provable from within - Godel, or not. (dON'T ASK ME ABOUT real, please G) JM On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:21 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/29/2012 10:21

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-10-29 Thread meekerdb
Right. And even less than complete models can run afoul of Godel, e.g. if I created a model of myself. It might be an accurate model, but I couldn't know that it was. On the other hand, John Mikes could know that it was. Brent On 10/29/2012 12:53 PM, John Mikes wrote: Brent, I think if a

Re: Solipsism = 1p

2012-10-29 Thread John Mikes
*Bruno*, I cannot keep up with argumentation that includes opposites to ALL tenets previously stated. Who knows what kind of *'hardwire* does a brain have (I mean: not the physiological tissue-construct, but the complex brain* function* also called 'brain). Anatomists, physiologists, neurologists

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-10-29 Thread Stephen P. King
On 10/29/2012 1:08 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Oct 2012, at 14:36, Stephen P. King wrote: [Bruno Marchal wrote:] So numbers are universal and can be treated mathematically as always. I agree, but the concept of numbers has no meaning prior to the existence of objects that can be

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-29 Thread Jason Resch
John, Are you on this list to learn or to argue? Jason On Oct 29, 2012, at 12:58 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: We know that as well as we know anything about physics This is not valid. NOT A

Re: wave function collapse

2012-10-29 Thread Richard Ruquist
Bruno, Here is the snooker- from wiki MWI: ' Deutsch's derivation is a two-stage proof: first he shows that the number of orthonormal Everett-worlds after a branching is proportional to the conventional probability density. Who cares what the density of branching is- each branch is independent