On 09 Jan 2009, at 20:12, Günther Greindl wrote:
Hi Bruno,
and Cantor get a contradiction from that. You assume the diagram is
indeed a piece of an existing bijection in Platonia, or known by God.
No, you misunderstand me there - I just meant that we need to take the
step to infinity -
Hi Bruno,
I don't understand what you mean by computations being infinitely far
away. In the UD deployment, which I will wrote UD*, all computations
begins soon or later (like all dominoes falls soon or later in the
infinite discrete dominoe-sequences). All computations reach any of
Hi Bruno,
and Cantor get a contradiction from that. You assume the diagram is
indeed a piece of an existing bijection in Platonia, or known by God.
No, you misunderstand me there - I just meant that we need to take the
step to infinity - see below.
that you get by flipping the 0 and 1
Hi Günther,
On 07 Jan 2009, at 22:47, Günther Greindl wrote:
thanks for your comments, I interleave my response.
showed a glimpse of the vastness of the UD. And, I agree, _in the
limit_
there will be an infinite number of histories. So, as we have to
also
take into account infinite
Hi Bruno,
thanks for your comments, I interleave my response.
showed a glimpse of the vastness of the UD. And, I agree, _in the limit_
there will be an infinite number of histories. So, as we have to also
take into account infinite delay, we must take this limit into account
and have
- Original Message -
From: Günther Greindl guenther.grei...@gmail.com
To: everything-l...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: Boltzmann Brains, consciousness and the arrow of time
We need only turing emulability, because quantum states,
although
Hi Günther,
I agree with your main point. My comments below concerns only details.
On 03 Jan 2009, at 23:53, Günther Greindl wrote:
Hi Bruno,
first of all thanks for the long answer, and yes, it was very helpful.
You described the production of all reals with a very vivid imagery;
it
Hi Stephen,
Stephen Paul King wrote:
Nice post! Coments soon.
Thanks :-) Looking forward to the comments.
Speaking of Svozil's work, please see: Cristian S. Calude, Peter H.
Hertling and Karl Svozil, ``Embedding Quantum Universes in Classical Ones'',
Foundations of Physics 29(3),
Subject: Re: Boltzmann Brains, consciousness and the arrow of time
Hi Bruno,
first of all thanks for the long answer, and yes, it was very helpful.
You described the production of all reals with a very vivid imagery;
it
showed a glimpse of the vastness of the UD. And, I agree, _in
Hi Bruno,
first of all thanks for the long answer, and yes, it was very helpful.
You described the production of all reals with a very vivid imagery; it
showed a glimpse of the vastness of the UD. And, I agree, _in the limit_
there will be an infinite number of histories. So, as we have to
: Saturday, January 03, 2009 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: Boltzmann Brains, consciousness and the arrow of time
Hi Bruno,
first of all thanks for the long answer, and yes, it was very helpful.
You described the production of all reals with a very vivid imagery; it
showed a glimpse of the vastness
On 31 Dec 2008, at 23:53, Brent Meeker wrote:
The present moment in quantum cosmology: challenges to the arguments
for the elimination of time
Authors: Lee Smolin
(Submitted on 29 Apr 2001)
Abstract: Barbour, Hawking, Misner and others have argued that time
cannot play an essential
Hi Günther,
On 01 Jan 2009, at 23:58, Günther Greindl wrote:
Bruno,
I have also wanted to ask how you come to 2^aleph_zero
Well, in part this results from the unbounded dumbness of the
universal doevtailing procedure which dovetails on all programs but
also on all non interacting
2009/1/1 Hal Finney h...@finney.org:
I want to emphasize that this picture of how Boltzmann fluctuations would
work is a consquence of the laws of thermodynamics, and time symmetry.
Sometimes people imagine that the fluctuation into the Boltzmann
low-entropy state is fundamentally different
It seems to me that your reasoning illustrates well the problems with
physical supervenience and physicalism, and perhaps ASSA.
In any case the Universal Dovetailer generates all such gaz universes
generating the Boltzmann brains. Now the probability that you are
implemented by a
Bruno Marchal wrote:
It seems to me that your reasoning illustrates well the problems with
physical supervenience and physicalism, and perhaps ASSA.
In any case the Universal Dovetailer generates all such gaz universes
generating the Boltzmann brains. Now the probability that you are
On 01 Jan 2009, at 21:10, Brent Meeker wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
It seems to me that your reasoning illustrates well the problems with
physical supervenience and physicalism, and perhaps ASSA.
In any case the Universal Dovetailer generates all such gaz universes
generating the
Hal,
I have entertained quite similar musings some time ago, and this led me
to a position I called naive materialism NMAT some time ago on this
list - that causality does not matter, and consciousness would supervene
on the material states directly - and both backward and forward versions
Bruno,
I have also wanted to ask how you come to 2^aleph_zero
Well, in part this results from the unbounded dumbness of the
universal doevtailing procedure which dovetails on all programs but
also on all non interacting collection of programs (as all interacting
one).
How do you
Hal Finney wrote:
Sometimes we consider here the nature of consciousness, whether observer
moments need to be linked to one another, the role of causality in
consciousness, etc. I thought of an interesting puzzle about Boltzmann
Brains which offers a new twist to these questions.
As most
20 matches
Mail list logo
