Re: The hard problem of matter

On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 8:36:01 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 1:17 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > *>As I have proposed, information processing alone will not lead to >> consciousness. Experience processing >>

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 10:49:44 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 10/15/2018 5:06 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 6:45:11 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 10/14/2018 11:13 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, October 14, 2018 at 9:53:07 PM

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 12:54 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: Whatever one defines intelligence to be, for something (or some /being/, as some might prefer) to be conscious (for those who think it is real)  is a more certain thing. Intelligence is something observable, as here:

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 12:52:25 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 10/16/2018 12:54 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > Whatever one defines intelligence to be, for something (or some *being*, > as some might prefer) to be conscious (for those who think it is real) is > a more certain thing.

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 9:40:05 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 14 Oct 2018, at 20:01, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Sunday, October 14, 2018 at 8:24:29 AM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> In a two state system, such as a qubit, what forces the interpretation >>

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 1:01:40 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 10/16/2018 1:14 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > But here is the thesis I think of the experience-oriented (vs. > information-oriented) paradigm*: *Experience cannot be represented: It > does not exist outside of its

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 3:28:17 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 11:17:56 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: >> >> From: >> >> >> On Sunday, October 14, 2018 at 5:08:42 PM UTC, smitra wrote: >>> >>> On 14-10-2018 15:24, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >>> > In a

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 1:00 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 8:50:57 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: The "separation" of science from religion was the invention of science as a way of knowing what was fact and what was superstition.  Science was testing beliefs and

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 6:21 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: As long as there is no evidence for a notion of primary matter (à-la Aristotle), the idea of a primitively material universe, or ontological universe is premature. How can there be evidence for something being ontologically primitive except that

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

On 10/16/2018 7:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: The problem of the “many-world” is that a “world” is not an easy concept that we could take for granted. But it's the concept used in modal logic. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 1:14 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: But here is the thesis I think of the experience-oriented (vs. information-oriented) paradigm*: /Experience cannot be represented: It does not exist outside of its material instantiation./ But that's just an assertion that, not only am I giving

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:05 PM Brent Meeker wrote: >> you know for a fact you're not conscious all the time, you know you're >> not conscious when you're sleeping or under anesthesia or before you were >> born and, although you don't know for certain, you probably suspect you >> won't be

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

From: mailto:agrayson2...@gmail.com>> On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 3:28:17 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 11:17:56 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: The state is still the original state until decoherence kicks in

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 12:02 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 12:52:25 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 10/16/2018 12:54 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: Whatever one defines intelligence to be, for something (or some /being/, as some might prefer) to be conscious (for those

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 10:28 AM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:05 PM Brent Meeker > wrote: >> you know for a fact you're not conscious all the time, you know you're not conscious when you're sleeping or under anesthesia or

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 11:58 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 1:01:40 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 10/16/2018 1:14 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: But here is the thesis I think of the experience-oriented (vs. information-oriented) paradigm*: /Experience cannot be

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 6:13 PM Brent Meeker wrote: >>Nothing happened to them because neurons and hormones also have structure >> as do all complex objects, about the only things that don't (as far as we >> know) are electrons, positrons, photons, neutrinos and possibly quarks >> and Black

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 5:43:51 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 10/16/2018 12:02 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 12:52:25 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 10/16/2018 12:54 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> Whatever one defines intelligence to be, for

Re: The hard problem of matter

On 10/16/2018 9:55 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 5:43:51 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 10/16/2018 12:02 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 12:52:25 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 10/16/2018 12:54 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

On 10/15/2018 10:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: From: *Brent Meeker* mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> On 10/15/2018 11:21 AM, smitra wrote: > This all suggests to me that we live in a multiverse where each moment > of time defines a different universe, memories of the past refer to > alternative

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

From: *Brent Meeker* mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> On 10/15/2018 10:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: From: *Brent Meeker* mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> On 10/15/2018 11:21 AM, smitra wrote: > This all suggests to me that we live in a multiverse where each moment > of time defines a different

Re: The hard problem of matter

On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 8:50:57 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > The "separation" of science from religion was the invention of science as > a way of knowing what was fact and what was superstition. Science was > testing beliefs and holding them only provisionally. > > Brent > > > They

Re: The hard problem of matter

> On 11 Oct 2018, at 19:11, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 11:19:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 9 Oct 2018, at 20:18, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 9:05:27 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 7 Oct

Re: Interpretation of Superposition

> On 14 Oct 2018, at 20:01, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, October 14, 2018 at 8:24:29 AM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > In a two state system, such as a qubit, what forces the interpretation that > the system is in both states simultaneously before measurement, versus the >