Information theory, computationalism and the science of Platonia

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Information theory, computationalism and the science of Platonia I am not a mathematician, so what I say here may be nonsense, but can't we say something more scientific about Platonia and monads than we have ? For example: a) I think that the physics or science of Platonia must be

Re: Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be aproblem ?

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal Thanks. Then the numbers are noit separate but included in the truth. My feeling is that the truth then may be the truth(s) of information theory. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/2/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving

Re: Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno, Could it not be that there is nothing especially sacred about the natural numbers, that these are, as Hobbes put it regarding words, but counterfeit tokens ? And the real controlling force which uses them is information theory ? That is to say, intelligence. Roger Clough,

Isn't intelligence more basic than numbers ?

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi Cool. But I am in the minority who believe that intelligence is more basic than the natural numbers. Because it does things with numbers. It governs them. The ancient philosophers had no concept of information theory, so it is not surprising then that they held numbers to

IMHO the properties of life

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Hal Ruhl Those are objective features of life, but IMHO a) life is subjective not objective. b) life is intelligence itself. c) intelligence governs an objective body. d) intelligence is the ability to make choices on one's own, without outside help or rules. e) The above is

numbers as not the primary entities- because they can do nothing by themselves

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Stephen P. King The reason why I think of numbers as not being primary to being is that they act as objects in a sea of intelligence. It is the intelligence that is primary because intelligence is subjective. Intelligence operates on numbers. By themselves, numbers can do nothing except

numbers are static, geometry is dynamic

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Stephen P. King et al, For what it's worth, in the philosophy of mathematics, numbers are considered as static entities (they don't change). Instead, change is a property of geometry. I suppose because angles can change. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/2/2012 Forever is a long

Re: Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be aproblem ?

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
ROGER: Hi Bruno Marchal 1) Yes, numbers float in a sea of universal mind (the One). BRUNO: The ONE is much more than the universal mind, as it is where the universal minds compete, perhaps before eventually recognizing themselves and reuniting, or fusing, and coming back to the ONE

Re: Solipsism = 1p

2012-11-02 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: But you can't stay awake unless your hardware allows it. So what? I can't shoot a gun unless the trigger works. Does that mean I'm not shooting the gun by pulling the trigger? You are external to the gun, but you

computationalism and the construction of ideas

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
To borrow a couple of playing pieces from kant, two basic , or the two basic, pieces of pre-existence in spacetime are the intuitions time and space. I think these are more useful than numbers because things are actually made of them. Perhaps these are 0 (yin) and 1 (yang) or perhaps they are

Making meaningful computations

2012-11-02 Thread Roger Clough
Any image can be written as a string of binary numbers and similarly with sound. In mp4 we can have both image and sound. Some of these sounds and images would be meaningful, for example mozart's requiem as a video, or a nightly news broadcast. In principle any string of binary numbers can be

Re: Solipsism = 1p

2012-11-02 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Friday, November 2, 2012 8:18:29 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: But you can't stay awake unless your hardware allows it. So what? I can't shoot a gun unless the trigger works. Does that mean I'm

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-11-02 Thread John Clark
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: let's presume that in 999 out of 1,000 almost identical standard models that exist in string theory, the half-life is 1 us. But in 1 out of those 1,000, the half life is 10 us. If you are the experimenter what can physics

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-11-02 Thread Jason
On Friday, November 2, 2012 10:07:36 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Jason Resch jason...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: let's presume that in 999 out of 1,000 almost identical standard models that exist in string theory, the half-life is 1 us. But in 1 out of

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 19:13, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 01.11.2012 18:30 Bruno Marchal said the following: On 01 Nov 2012, at 11:09, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: ... ÔÇťAbsolute Spirit is the fundamental reality. But in order to create the world, the Absolute manifests itself, or goes out of itself

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:21, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: [SPK] Bruno would have us, in step 8 of UDA, to not assume a concrete robust physical universe. ? Reread step 8. Step 7 and step 8 are the only steps where I explicitly do assume a primitive

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:25, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: the you before the duplication or the you after the duplication? All the you after, are the you before, by definition of comp. OK, but the you before is not the you after.

Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be a problem ?

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/31/2012 9:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 1) Yes, numbers float in a sea of universal mind (the One). 2) Here's a thought. If the universe acts

Re: On the ontological status of elementary arithmetic

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:42, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Enumerate the programs computing functions fro N to N, (or the equivalent notion according to your chosen system). let us call those functions: phi_0, phi_1, phi_2, ... (the phi_i) Let B be a

Re: Communicability

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 22:34, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 01:01, Stephen P. King wrote: Dear Bruno, Exactly what do these temporal concepts, such as explain, solve, interacting and emulating, mean in an atemporal setting? You

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Nov 2012, at 22:50, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 12:04 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 01:18, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/31/2012 12:45 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: can stop reading as you need to assume the numbers (or anything Turing equivalent) to get them.

Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be aproblem ?

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Nov 2012, at 10:34, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Thanks. Then the numbers are noit separate but included in the truth. Losely speaking, OK. Numbers are objects, truth concerns only propositions. My feeling is that the truth then may be the truth(s) of information theory.

Re: Self-ascription and Perfect Model Model

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Nov 2012, at 10:42, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno, Could it not be that there is nothing especially sacred about the natural numbers, that these are, as Hobbes put it regarding words, but counterfeit tokens ? Numbers, with + and * laws, is mainly the same things than digital

Re: The One is not a number but a metaphor

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Nov 2012, at 11:50, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal When I refer to the One, I think of it not as a number 1 but as a metaphor. Well, the ONE is not the number 1. OK. The Soul is the identity of a monad, including the supreme monad. The soul does not change, even though the

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Nov 2012, at 16:07, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: let's presume that in 999 out of 1,000 almost identical standard models that exist in string theory, the half-life is 1 us. But in 1 out of those 1,000, the half life is

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 5:29 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net wrote: On 11/1/2012 12:23 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: Don't get me started on reductionism! I don't believe in it

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 12:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:21, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: [SPK] Bruno would have us, in step 8 of UDA, to not assume a concrete robust physical universe. ? Reread step 8. Step 7 and step 8 are the only steps

Re: Emergence of Properties

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 12:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: How can anything emerge from something having non properties? Magic? Dear Bruno, Why do you consider magic as a potential answer to your question? After thinking about your question while I was waiting to pick up my daughter from school, it

Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be a problem ?

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/31/2012 9:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 1) Yes, numbers float in a sea of universal mind (the One).

RE: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread Hal Ruhl
Hi Stephen: -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:50 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum On

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-11-02 Thread John Clark
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: He believes he still exist, because he believes, or assumed, comp. People believe they exist and in real life they don't have or need a reason for doing so. And I no longer know what comp means. Comp is that we can survive with a

Re: On the ontological status of elementary arithmetic

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 12:55 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:42, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Enumerate the programs computing functions fro N to N, (or the equivalent notion according to your chosen system). let us call those functions: phi_0,

Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread John Mikes
Dear Hal, nice to read you again after all those years. Life is a topic I brought up many times (as a question of course) and have only a vague idea - opposing the conventional scientific stance based on the carbon-etc. foundational bio/physiological restrictions. In my *speculations* 'life' is

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-11-02 Thread Jason Resch
On Nov 2, 2012, at 4:02 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: He believes he still exist, because he believes, or assumed, comp. People believe they exist and in real life they don't have or need a reason for doing so. And

Re: AGI

2012-11-02 Thread John Mikes
Bruno: you got me. I wrote about things we cannot know - we have no capability to think of it - and you deny that based on products of the human mind (math - logic) saying YES, we can know everything (that we or our products DO know). You claimed to be agnostic (more than myself) - now I don't see

Re: Communicability

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 1:08 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 22:34, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 01:01, Stephen P. King wrote: Dear Bruno, Exactly what do these temporal concepts, such as explain, solve, interacting and

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I can understand these symbols because there is at least a way to physically implement them. Those notion have nothing to do with physical implementation. So your thinking about them is not a physical act? Too much ambiguous. Even staying in

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: bundles of arithmetic statements generate many individual observers that in turn interact (which I model via a combination of cyclic gossiping on graphs and bisimulations) with each other to define a common physical world which in turn acts to

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: You are the one saying that truth is limited to the means of knowing!!! Yes and no, Truth is limited to the *possibility* of knowledge of it. In the absence of the possibility of a statement being true (or false), there is not such thing as true

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Are you familiar with Jaakko Hintikka's ideas? I am using his concept of game theoretic semantics to derive truth valuations. I read this. yes. I don't see relevant at all. I do appreciate his linking of intention and intension, but it is a bit

Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 4:27 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote: Let me refer you to a very old paper of mine: http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/life.html I took a quick look. I may need some help understanding it fully. I occasionally play with the idea that Dark Energy is a spatially uniform leak of

Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 4:27 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote: [SPK] Do you see mutation as a one-to-many map and selection as a many -to-one map? Well the DNA strings we know of are finite [n characters] so a particular example is a one in some sense and this string's finite number of mutations 4 ^ n+ is a many.

RE: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread Hal Ruhl
Hi Stephen: -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 6:37 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum On 11/2/2012

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2012/11/2 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I can understand these symbols because there is at least a way to physically implement them. Those notion have nothing to do with physical implementation. So your thinking about them is not a

Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be a problem ?

2012-11-02 Thread meekerdb
On 11/2/2012 3:19 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/2/2012 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/31/2012 9:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 1) Yes,

Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 8:25 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Either you can have emerging properties of nothing or you can't. Either there is infinite regress or not, whatever is true (and one or the other is), it's not an obstacle. Hi Questin, It depends on whether you think of Nothing as merely an

Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be a problem ?

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 10:48 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 11/2/2012 3:19 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/2/2012 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/31/2012

RE: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread Hal Ruhl
Hi Stephen: I think this got lost so I sending it again. -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 6:37 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Life:

Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum

2012-11-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 11/2/2012 11:47 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote: Hi Stephen: I think this got lost so I sending it again. -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 6:37 PM To:

Re: Could universes in a multiverse be solipsistic ? Would this be a problem ?

2012-11-02 Thread meekerdb
On 11/2/2012 10:38 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: No, that is an incoherent statement as it pretends to be meaningful in the absence of any means to evaluate its meaningfulness. So what means do you used to evaluate, Either snow is white or snow is not white.? My eyes can still