- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
>
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 09:27:50PM +0100, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
>>
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 09:27:50PM +0100, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > I use universe and history, or OM-sequence almost synonymously. Since
> > it was I who made the comment, it is what I meant. I think your method
> > can only work if the sequence of OMs observed by an observer is
> > describ
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
>
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 02:31:45PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
>>
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 02:31:45PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > No - by universe, I mean a classical branch of the multiverse. The
> > multiverse is, as you say, deterministic.
>
> I think I should just try to clarify here - the minimum specification idea
> as applied to a multiverse (w
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
>> >> A final brief point in an attempt to help clarify matters. Th
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 09:51:34PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > As to your pessimism about AI, I don't share that. It is quite
> > feasible to add sources of quantum randomness to machines, and indeed
> > there is already quite a bit of literature on this subject, mostly for
> > cryptogr
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 04:19:44PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
>>
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 04:19:44PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > The minimal specification including all OMs in a universe could not be
> > sufficient to specify the OMs completely. There must always be some random
> > component to the complete specification of an OM.
>
> Bang goes AI! I
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
.
.
.
>> >> If one takes the description string x (up to
>
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:40:58PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 1:30 AM
> Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish whit
Original Message -
> From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 1:30 AM
> Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
>
>
> >>
> >> Comparing identical OM's/OM sequences, i
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 1:30 AM
Subject: Re: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
>>
>> Comparing identical OM's/OM sequences, it seems to me that I
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 07:58:35PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 2:56 AM
> Subject: Malcom/Standish white rabbit
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 2:56 AM
> Subject: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
> .
> .>
> In your 'Why Occam's Razor' paper, sect 2, following a discussion of the
> Schmidhuber ensemble and the Universal Prior, it is sta
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Standish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 2:56 AM
Subject: Malcom/Standish white rabbit solution
.
.
.
>>
>> (There appears to be a subsidiary issue of 'many description
I'm reposting this. I forgot that I have to have the everything-list
email address first, otherwise it bounces from GoogleGroups :(
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 08:56:24PM -, Alastair Malcolm wrote:
> I think this issue should be pushed further a little, since there seems to
> be a fundamental m
16 matches
Mail list logo
