Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 16 January 2014 16:26, Jason Resch wrote: > The computational metaphor in the sense of the brain works like the Intel > CPU inside the box on your desk is clearly misleading, but the sense that a > computer can in theory do everything your brain can do is almost certainly > correct. It is not t

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:12, Terren Suydam wrote: Right, and QTI isn't even much of a comfort in terms of avoiding your own death, as there are no guarantees about the quality of the surviving continuations. I remember Bruno saying once (paraphrasing) "consciousness is a prison". Otto Rössl

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:14, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, (and Dan) When people die they vanish from existence. To believe otherwise may be comforting, but it's just superstition.. In your "theory" perhaps. But then "my body" is not Turing emulable. Comp must be false. There must be a liv

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:28, freqflyer07281972 wrote: Wow, Liz, very sorry to hear about your friend. If you don't mind me asking (and if you do mind, simply ignore my question), if you magically just knew that the universe was in fact a large computation engine where all possibilities are ev

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:40, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 12:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: And the answer is "yes, he would know that, but not immediately". So it would not change the indeterminacy, as he will not immediately see that he is in a simulation, but, unless you intervene repeatedly

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:44, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 12:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Jan 2014, at 22:39, LizR wrote: On 15 January 2014 10:29, Terren Suydam wrote: condescending dismissal in 3... 2... 1... Teehee. Not a condescending dismissal in anyone else's mind, however, jus

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:02, Terren Suydam wrote: On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: There is still FPI going on in the "rogue" simulation - the one where Glak emerges from an alternative-physics, as there are infinite continuations from Glak's state(s) in the alternat

Re: A different take on the ontological status of Math

On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:03, Chris de Morsella wrote: Stephen -- I like how he derives the natural numbers from some basic set operations on an empty set. One question though how does the empty set itself arise. Arithmetic is equivalent to finite set theory (hereditary finite set theory, HF

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:11, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I am not convinced, as I tend to not believe in any primitive time and space, at least when I tend to believe in comp (of course I *know* nothing). QM is indeed reversible (in large part), but using this

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:49, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: This should be clearer, hopefully, when I translate "probability" in arithmetic. If Glak is Löbian, then it has the same physics than us What does "same" mean here. Same coupling constants?...same num

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

2014/1/16 Bruno Marchal > > On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:02, Terren Suydam wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> There is still FPI going on in the "rogue" simulation - the one where >> Glak emerges from an alternative-physics, as there are infinite >> continuatio

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

2014/1/16 Quentin Anciaux > > > > 2014/1/16 Bruno Marchal > >> >> On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:02, Terren Suydam wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> There is still FPI going on in the "rogue" simulation - the one where >>> Glak emerges from an alternativ

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 15 Jan 2014, at 23:30, LizR wrote: On 16 January 2014 10:27, freqflyer07281972 > wrote: I have a funny comic I think all of you will appreciate to one extent or another. I'm also curious as to your reaction regarding the status of "questions" versus "answers": http://comicsthatsaysometh

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 16 January 2014 19:03, Jason Resch wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason, >> >> 1. First I demonstrated that SR falsifies block time (by requiring a >> moving arrow of time and a present moment), so since SR is well verified >> block time is false. >> > >

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 16 January 2014 19:20, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 7:44 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear LizR, > > But stop and think of the implications of what even Bruno is saying. > *Space > is completely a construction of our minds.* *There is no 3,1 dimensional > Riemannian manifold out t

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

I tend not to consider that a brain is a digital computer. The most accurate analogy is that a brain is a _program_ made of different processes that run certain specific algorithms, some of them fixed and certain of them capable of learning by various methods. And finally some of them can execute a

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Hard Problem

On 16 January 2014 18:29, Jason Resch wrote: > Colin, Liz, > > What do you find wrong with what Dennett said? > I didn't actually say I found anything wrong with it, just that I would expect him to want to drop the hard problem. I said that because he's wanted to for decades now, and indeed beli

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 16 Jan 2014, at 00:12, Edgar L. Owen wrote: All, I want to try to state my model of how spacetime is created by quantum events more clearly and succinctly. Begin by Imagining a world in which everything is computational. That does not exist. If everything is computational, I am com

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 16 January 2014 19:00, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear LizR, > > One thing that this line of thinking that I am pursuing implies, is that > systems what have different computational capacities will have differing > "realities". The best analogy/toy model to explain this is to consider an > elec

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 16 January 2014 20:00, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 7:08 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 16 January 2014 14:11, meekerdb wrote: > >> >> You can do that (in fact it may have been done). You have two emitters >> with polarizers and a detector at which you post-select only those >> particles that a

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 16 January 2014 21:34, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:40, meekerdb wrote: > > On 1/15/2014 12:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > And the answer is "yes, he would know that, but not immediately". > > So it would not change the indeterminacy, as he will not immediately see > that h

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 16 January 2014 18:07, Jason Resch wrote: > Liz, > > I came across that page of yours a few months ago through random > searching. (I forgot what I was searching for), but only later did I > realize it was your blog! > > Out of curiosity, do you recall what the 2 "other" responses were to your

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 16 January 2014 19:44, freqflyer07281972 wrote: > > I totally agree with you that science, when you really start getting into > the implications of things like QM (and relativity for that matter), > provides some rather unsettling (and yet very exciting!) conclusions. And > yet... they always r

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

There are an awful lot of hidden assumptions implied by that first explicit assumption "imagine a world in which everything is computational". I've asked for clarification from Edgar, but I won't hold my breath while I wait. On 16 January 2014 22:44, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 16 Jan 2014, at

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 16 Jan 2014, at 01:10, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 3:20 PM, LizR wrote: On 16 January 2014 12:12, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Begin by Imagining a world in which everything is computational. What is this world? What does it consist of? What is doing the computations? Whatever it is, Bruno's

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 16 Jan 2014, at 01:46, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Ok, speculatively jumping into the Tegmark book, which I am plodding through and his 4 levels of the multiverse, I need to throw out this question. Is it even possible, in principle, to physically traverse into another universe, a paralle

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Hard Problem

On 16 Jan 2014, at 08:11, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 7:20 PM, LizR wrote: Ah, well, I would expect Dennett to say that! On 16 January 2014 16:19, Colin Geoffrey Hales > wrote: http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25289 I think Dennett is right. As soon as we're able to build robots t

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 16 January 2014 13:10, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 3:20 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 16 January 2014 12:12, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >>Begin by Imagining a world in which everything is computational. >> > > What is this world? What does it consist of? What is doing the > computations? > > W

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 16 Jan 2014, at 02:19, freqflyer07281972 wrote: Unless I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together, of course. Well, that's just it, isn't it? :-) Or indeed, if all of this "self" stuff is really a very sophisticated mental model we run... I've tried making that cla

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 16 Jan 2014, at 03:08, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 4:32 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: Yes, GR assumes smooth Riemannian manifolds. The mapping works for them wonderfully. That fact was proven by the people that discovered Fiber Bundles. The hard thing to grasp is how the mapping betw

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 16 Jan 2014, at 03:10, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 4:23 PM, LizR wrote: So although the "troll" theory is tempting, because that is exactly how trolls behave, I'm going to go for a "bot" instead. Someone decided to write a programme which trots out a theory that doesn't make sense, th

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On 16 Jan 2014, at 03:46, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, meekerdb wrote: A long, rambling but often interesting discussion among guys at MIRI about how to make an AI that is superintelligent but not dangerous (FAI=Friendly AI). Here's an amusing excerpt that sta

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 16 Jan 2014, at 01:57, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 4:03 PM, LizR wrote: By the way, I may have this wrong but it seems to me your "hyperdeterminism" objection is an objection to block universes generally. I can't see how the big crunch (or timelike infinity) being a boundary condition

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Thanks, SP. I guess I will just have to buck and be satisfied with one universe. ;-) -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King To: everything-list Sent: Wed, Jan 15, 2014 7:54 pm Subject: Re: Tegmark's New Book Dear spudboy100, As far as I know, no. It isn't possible to shift

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? Computer "Science"

On 16 Jan 2014, at 04:02, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25377 Neil Gershenfeld Physicist, Director, MIT's Center for Bits and Atoms; Author, FAB Totally agree: He blames Turing and von Neumann So do I. He assumes both comp and weak materialism. In fact som

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Thanks, Liz. I am suspecting that Stargate or Sliders is not just around the corner, then. Cancel my trip to Neverland then! -Original Message- From: LizR To: everything-list Sent: Wed, Jan 15, 2014 8:07 pm Subject: Re: Tegmark's New Book On 16 January 2014 13:46, wrote: Ok, spe

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 16 Jan 2014, at 04:05, Jason Resch wrote: Hyper determinism makes little sense as a serious theory to me. Why should particle properties conform to what a computer's random number generator outputs, and then the digits of Pi, and then the binary expansion of the square root of 2, all va

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 16 Jan 2014, at 09:11, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 16 January 2014 16:26, Jason Resch wrote: The computational metaphor in the sense of the brain works like the Intel CPU inside the box on your desk is clearly misleading, but the sense that a computer can in theory do everything your

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 16 Jan 2014, at 04:14, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25336 Rodney A. Brooks Roboticist; Panasonic Professor of Robotics (emeritus) , MIT; Founder, Chairman & CTO, Rethink Robotics; Author, Flesh and Machines While we’re at it Lots of good stuff in

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Hard Problem

On 16 Jan 2014, at 04:19, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25289 Daniel C. Dennett Philosopher; Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, Co- Director, Center for Cognitive Studies, Tufts University; Author, Intuition Pumps And again Cheers Niloc

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 16 Jan 2014, at 04:25, freqflyer07281972 wrote: On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 4:54:09 PM UTC-5, cdemorsella wrote: Man that’s uncool. You may think he is an idiot, but to go troll the internet and then publish on this list his very personal life is crossing a line. I think you owe the

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Brent, No, moving just means changing. Time most certainly changes, and if you accept that time is a 4th-dimension (necessary if you accept SR and GR) there can certainly be movement along the time axis... We see the movement of time all the time and measure it with our clocks. I hate to use t

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Brent, Sure. So what? That's not inconsistent with everything being at one and only one point of time as time continually moves. That is in fact what proves that time moves. Edgar On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 10:40:49 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 1/15/2014 5:02 PM, LizR wrote: > > Secon

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Chris, Reality itself is doing the computing... The aspect of reality called 'happening' drives it... Edgar On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 11:10:16 PM UTC-5, cdemorsella wrote: > > > > > > *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *LizR > *S

On the nature and existence of "many non computational things"

Dear Bruno, I would like to start a new thread to discuss the nature and existence of the "many non computational things" that you have mentioned in your posts. Could you find a few moments to write some remarks on these? In particular I wonder if their proposed non-computability can be expan

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Stephen, Bruno and I agree on this one, our usually imagined space is completely a construction of our minds. That is fundamental to my theory. I explain in detail how it happens in my new topic post "Another shot at how spacetime emerges from quantum computations" if anyone cares to read it...

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Jason, This is only a problem if you don't understand that everything happens in the present moment P-time. The clock times diverge in value but always in the same present moment. There is no 'catching up' in p-time because nothing ever leaves it no matter how fast or slow their clocks are runn

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? Computer "Science"

Dear Bruno, Let me first say that I share your opinion of physicalism! As to the empirical evidence of inorganic minds. What behavior should we look for? I ask this with all seriousness, as I have been researching methods to detect AGI (another way to denote inorganic minds) and have found that

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:11 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 16 January 2014 16:26, Jason Resch wrote: The computational metaphor in the sense of the brain works like the Intel CPU inside the box on your desk is clearly misleading, but the sense that a computer can in theory do everythi

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Hard Problem

Dear Bruno, Hear Hear! Dennett wants to be correct by making the Hard Problem "go away". that is the most lazy way of solving the problem: making a long winded wand-waving argument that consciousness is an illusion and then failing to explain the persistence of the stipulated illusion! On Thu, J

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Stephen, It's amazing how much your mouth has to move to tell me it's not moving! Edgar On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:55:09 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Edgar, > > Bingo! You are correct. All motion in space-time is an illusion. The > ancient greeks figured that out already

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

Dear Jason, Could you be more specific about why you are skeptical of p-zombies? I have my reasons to disbelieve in them, but I am curious as to your reasoning. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:11 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > On 16 Jan

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Edgar, How about this twist on your claim: Reality is isomorphic to the computations and its dynamics (thermodynamics) drives it. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Chris, > > Reality itself is doing the computing... The aspect of reality called > 'happening' drives

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Dear Edgar, What mouth? It is only the relations between numbers! On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Stephen, > > It's amazing how much your mouth has to move to tell me it's not moving! > > Edgar > > > On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:55:09 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On Jan 16, 2014, at 5:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Jan 2014, at 03:46, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, meekerdb wrote: A long, rambling but often interesting discussion among guys at MIRI about how to make an AI that is superintelligent but not dangerous

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Stephen, No, it's not static relations between numbers, it's an active computational process. If just static relations between numbers your mouth would just be hanging open forever in the same look of shock... Edgar On Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:48:44 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > >

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Brent, Whoa, back up a little. This is the argument that proves every INDIVIDUAL observer has his OWN present moment time. You are trying to extend it to a cosmic universal time which this argument doesn't address. That's the second argument you referenced. This argument demonstrates that for

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On Jan 16, 2014, at 8:41 AM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Jason, Could you be more specific about why you are skeptical of p- zombies? I have my reasons to disbelieve in them, but I am curious as to your reasoning. Ask a zombie if it is conscious, and it will say yes. For some

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Dear Edgar, The "universality" of the first person experience of a flow of events (what you denote as time) is addressed by Bruno's First Person Indeterminism (FPI) concept. This universality cannot be said to allow for a singular present moment for all observers such that they can have it in c

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

Dear Jason, I see a flaw in your argument. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > On Jan 16, 2014, at 8:41 AM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > > Dear Jason, > > Could you be more specific about why you are skeptical of p-zombies? I > have my reasons to disbelieve in them,

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Stephen, What is this magical FPI that tells us in this present moment that there is no such present moment? What's the actual supposed proof? Edgar On Thursday, January 16, 2014 10:17:31 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Edgar, > > > The "universality" of the first person experie

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 2:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > It [entropy] is NOT the log of the number of ways a macro-state could > form. That would be ambiguous in any case (do different order of events > count as different ways? > Yes obviously. > the Boltzmann formula shows the relationship between

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Dear Edgar, I already wrote up one argument against the concept of a universal present moment using the general covariance requirement of GR. Did you read it? It is impossible to define a clock on an infinitesimal region of space-time thus it is impossible to define a "present moment" in a way t

Retiring the universe

If any of you haven't seen it, you will likely be quite interesting the The Edge's list of responses to this year's question, "What scientific idea is ready for retirement?" Some of the answers are fascinating, some are absurd, and some are confusing. Take a look! http://www.edge.org/respons

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Do you have an explanation for why reality time computes fewer moments for someone accelerating than someone at rest? Jason On Jan 16, 2014, at 9:09 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Brent, Whoa, back up a little. This is the argument that proves every INDIVIDUAL observer has his OWN present mo

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On Jan 16, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Jason, I see a flaw in your argument. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Jan 16, 2014, at 8:41 AM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Jason, Could you be more specific about why you are skeptical o

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Dear Edgar, > > I already wrote up one argument against the concept of a universal > present moment using the general covariance requirement of GR. Did you read > it? It is impossible to define a clock on

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 16 Jan 2014, at 10:28, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014/1/16 Bruno Marchal On 15 Jan 2014, at 21:02, Terren Suydam wrote: On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: There is still FPI going on in the "rogue" simulation - the one where Glak emerges from an alternative-phy

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > The simplest and by far most likely answer is to assume that the world we > appear to live in IS the real actual world > Maybe. But it could be argued that if the ability to perform vast calculations is possible (and I can't see why it woul

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 1/15/2014 10:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:46 PM, mailto:spudboy...@aol.com>> wrote: Ok, speculatively jumping into the Tegmark book, which I am plodding through and his 4 levels of the multiverse, I need to throw out this question. Is it even possible,

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 16 Jan 2014, at 10:41, Alberto G. Corona wrote: I tend not to consider that a brain is a digital computer. I agree. Then comp explains completely why a brain is definitely not a digital computer. A brain is a physical object. And if you grasp the step seven, you should understand than

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 1/15/2014 11:25 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:44 AM, freqflyer07281972 > wrote: I totally agree with you that science, when you really start getting into the implications of things like QM (and relativity for that matter), p

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On 14 Jan 2014, at 23:09, John Mikes wrote: Brent: thanks for submitting Colin Hales' words! I lost track of him lately in the West-Australian deserts (from where he seemed to move to become focussed on being accepted for scientific title(s) by establishment-scientist potentates - what I

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On 1/15/2014 11:35 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:46 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 1/15/2014 6:46 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: A long, rambling but often in

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/15/2014 11:42 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:58 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 1/15/2014 7:05 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Hyper determinism makes little sense as a serious theory to me. Why should particle properties conform to what a c

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Hi Jason, Yes I do have an explanation for how GR effects are computed. Thanks for asking. It's refreshing to just have someone ask a question about my theories rather than jumping to attack them. Much appreciated... The processor cycles for all computations are provided by P-time (clock time

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

Dear Jason, Let's try to be a bit more formal. Interleaving. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > On Jan 16, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > > Dear Jason, > > I see a flaw in your argument. > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Jason Resch < > jason

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On 1/16/2014 12:11 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 16 January 2014 16:26, Jason Resch wrote: The computational metaphor in the sense of the brain works like the Intel CPU inside the box on your desk is clearly misleading, but the sense that a computer can in theory do everything your brain ca

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On 1/16/2014 12:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: The body does not produces consciousness, it only make it possible for consciousness to forget the "higher self", and deludes us (in some sense) in having a "little ego" embedded in some history. Sounds like wishful thinking. Why "higher"? Why not

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

Brent, No, that's incorrect. No winning number needs to be drawn in the lottery. In fact there are no winners fairly often. That's why the jackpot keeps increasing Lotteries are not won by choosing among player submitted numbers, they are drawn at random from all possible numbers within th

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Dear Jason, I do not think that block time is a coherent idea. It assumes something impossible: that a unique foliation of space-time can be defined that correlates to a specific experience of an entity that is said to be embedded in the block. My argument is that the entire way that time is co

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 1/16/2014 12:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:40, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 12:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: And the answer is "yes, he would know that, but not immediately". So it would not change the indeterminacy, as he will not immediately see that he is in a simula

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:37 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 10:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:46 PM, wrote: > >> Ok, speculatively jumping into the Tegmark book, which I am plodding >> through and his 4 levels of the multiverse, I need to throw out this >> qu

Re: Edgar, Personal Attacks, and the Real Consequences of Comp

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:44 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 11:25 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:44 AM, freqflyer07281972 < > thismindisbud...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> I totally agree with you that science, when you really start getting into >> the implications

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

On 1/16/2014 12:38 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Jan 2014, at 20:44, meekerdb wrote: On 1/15/2014 12:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Jan 2014, at 22:39, LizR wrote: On 15 January 2014 10:29, Terren Suydam > wrote: condescending dismissal in 3... 2...

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Dear Edgar, I would agree with your idea here if you made one change: replace the single abstract computing space for all of space-time and replace it with an abstract computing space for each point of space-time. The *one* computation becomes an *infinite number* of disjoint computations. There

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:49 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 11:35 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:46 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/15/2014 6:46 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> A long, rambling but often

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:53 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/15/2014 11:42 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:58 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/15/2014 7:05 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> Hyper determinism makes little sense as a serious theory to me. Why >> should particle p

Re: Retiring the universe

I must admit I thought the MWI had already retired the universe. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

Re: Edge.org: 2014 : WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT? The Computational Metaphor

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Dear Jason, > > Let's try to be a bit more formal. Interleaving. > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> >> >> On Jan 16, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provense

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 1/16/2014 1:40 AM, LizR wrote: On 16 January 2014 19:20, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 1/15/2014 7:44 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear LizR, But stop and think of the implications of what even Bruno is saying. *Space is completely a construction of o

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 17 January 2014 03:10, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Chris, > > Reality itself is doing the computing... The aspect of reality called > 'happening' drives it... > > That isn't an answer to *anything* I've asked. Naming something doesn't explain what it is. I thought you'd have enough pride in your ow

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/16/2014 1:48 AM, LizR wrote: On 16 January 2014 20:00, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 1/15/2014 7:08 PM, LizR wrote: On 16 January 2014 14:11, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: You can do that (in fact it may have been done). You have two e

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Actually I can't be bothered asking Edgar the same questions again and getting no answer again (or a non-answer like the one he just gave Chris, while carefully ignoring me). If he wants to ignore my questions, I shouldnt waste time asking. So I have deleted my post restating the questions I asked

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 17 January 2014 07:56, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/16/2014 1:48 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 16 January 2014 20:00, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/15/2014 7:08 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 16 January 2014 14:11, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> >>> You can do that (in fact it may have been done). You have two >>>

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On 1/16/2014 3:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Jan 2014, at 03:46, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, meekerdb > wrote: A long, rambling but often interesting discussion among guys at MIRI about how to make an AI that is superintel

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/16/2014 4:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Yes, that's my point. Price make a logical point, though. But we have to abandon QM for QM + a lot of extra-information to select one reality. In that case why not come back to Ptolemeaus. The idea that it is the sun which moves in the sky is consiste

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Stephen, There is no "all of spacetime" nor "each point of spacetime" where the computations are occuring. Remember, that's an abstract dimensionLESS computational space prior to dimensional spacetime. It has no 'points' itself, it computes all points of dimensional space and clock time. They

Re: Tegmark's New Book

Stephen, PS: I agree with the rest of what you are saying here but again you are talking about clock time, dimensional spacetime, and not P-time which is distinct and is prior to any metrics... Edgar On Thursday, January 16, 2014 1:23:50 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Edgar, > >

Re: Tegmark's New Book

On 1/16/2014 7:09 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, Whoa, back up a little. This is the argument that proves every INDIVIDUAL observer has his OWN present moment time. You are trying to extend it to a cosmic universal time which this argument doesn't address. That's the second argument you refer

  1   2   >