Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Mar 2012, at 01:56, Joseph Knight wrote: On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Let me ask a question to everybody. Consider the WM duplication, starting from Helsinki, but this time, in W, you are reconstituted in two exemplars, in exactly the

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Mar 2012, at 04:44, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/29/2012 9:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 13:50, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 5:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Mar 2012, at 19:39, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 18:16, meekerdb wrote: But the 1p view of this is to be conscious *of something*, which you describe as the computation seen from the inside. What is it about these threads through different states that makes them an equivalence class with

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Mar 2012, at 19:43, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 10:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2012, at 17:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-02 Thread meekerdb
On 3/2/2012 1:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2012, at 19:43, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 10:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2012, at 17:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Mar 2012, at 19:17, meekerdb wrote: On 3/2/2012 1:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2012, at 19:43, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 10:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2012, at 17:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05,

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-02 Thread Joseph Knight
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Let me ask a question to everybody. Consider the WM duplication, starting from Helsinki, but this time, in W, you are reconstituted in two exemplars, in exactly the same environment. Is the probability, asked in Helsinki,

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-02 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/29/2012 9:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 13:50, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 5:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp substitute

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hello Stephen, On 29 Feb 2012, at 20:26, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/29/2012 4:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Digital physics says that the whole universe can be substituted with a program, that

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes them enough TE so that you can yes to the doctor who proposes to replace some part of

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread Stephen P. King
On 3/1/2012 3:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hello Stephen, On 29 Feb 2012, at 20:26, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/29/2012 4:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Digital physics says that the whole

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread meekerdb
On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes them enough TE so that you can yes to the

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Mar 2012, at 14:49, Stephen P. King wrote: On 3/1/2012 3:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hello Stephen, On 29 Feb 2012, at 20:26, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/29/2012 4:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread acw
On 3/1/2012 16:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes them enough

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread meekerdb
On 3/1/2012 9:57 AM, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 16:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Mar 2012, at 17:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread acw
On 3/1/2012 18:16, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 9:57 AM, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 16:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread meekerdb
On 3/1/2012 10:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2012, at 17:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread meekerdb
On 3/1/2012 10:39 AM, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 18:16, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 9:57 AM, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 16:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-03-01 Thread acw
On 3/1/2012 19:06, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 10:39 AM, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 18:16, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 9:57 AM, acw wrote: On 3/1/2012 16:54, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2012 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Feb 2012, at 21:05, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Digital physics says that the whole universe can be substituted with a program, that obviously imply comp (that we can substitue your brain with a digital one), but comp shows that to be

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Feb 2012, at 21:41, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Feb 2012, at 23:15, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/28 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Feb 2012, at 23:19, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Feb 2012, at 23:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 5:15 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: the you before is no more. That's what I have been arguing all along. Yes, doctor = Yes, death. It's delightful that there will be a digital imposter/identical twin who believes

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 5:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/29/2012 12:50 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 9:40 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 3:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciauxallco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Feb 2012, at 13:50, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 5:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Feb 29, 4:45 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 22:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 3:41 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: The implication of Comp is that there is no you.  You are an abstraction, a fiction, just another element in a model of the

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Feb 29, 5:03 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 23:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 5:15 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: the you before is no more. That's what I have been arguing all along. Yes, doctor = Yes, death. It's delightful

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread meekerdb
On 2/29/2012 1:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Digital physics says that the whole universe can be substituted with a program, that obviously imply comp (that we can substitue your brain with a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread meekerdb
On 2/29/2012 5:47 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/29/2012 12:50 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 9:40 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 3:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciauxallco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread meekerdb
On 2/29/2012 8:35 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 29, 4:45 am, Bruno Marchalmarc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 22:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 3:41 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: The implication of Comp is that there is no you. You are an abstraction, a fiction,

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Feb 2012, at 17:47, meekerdb wrote: On 2/29/2012 1:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Digital physics says that the whole universe can be substituted with a program, that obviously imply comp

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Feb 2012, at 17:35, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 29, 4:45 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 22:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 3:41 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: The implication of Comp is that there is no you. You are an abstraction, a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 29 Feb 2012, at 17:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 29, 5:03 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 23:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 5:15 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: the you before is no more. That's what I have been arguing all

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/29/2012 4:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2012, at 20:17, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Digital physics says that the whole universe can be substituted with a program, that obviously imply comp (that we can substitue your brain with a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread meekerdb
On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes them enough TE so that you can yes to the doctor who proposes to replace some part of your brain (which is made of matter) with a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2012/2/29 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes them enough TE so that you can yes to the doctor who proposes to replace some part of your

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-29 Thread meekerdb
On 2/29/2012 12:10 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/2/29 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 2/29/2012 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Comp says the exact contrary: it makes matter and physical processes not completely Turing emulable. But it makes

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 4:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Feb 2012, at 20:02, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/27/2012 12:26 PM, ronaldheld wrote: What observations or measurements can I perform that would falsify COMP? Hi, Any measurement of a physical process that cannot be simulated by a Turing

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 4:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Feb 2012, at 20:02, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/27/2012 12:26 PM, ronaldheld wrote: What observations or measurements can I perform that would falsify COMP? Hi, Any measurement of a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Feb 2012, at 16:29, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 4:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Feb 2012, at 20:02, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/27/2012 12:26 PM, ronaldheld wrote: What observations or measurements can I perform that would falsify COMP? Hi, Any measurement of a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread meekerdb
On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Dear Bruno, Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them. COMP is the conjunction of Yes Doctor, the Church Thesis and Arithmetic Realism, correct? I am now not sure of the definition of Digital physics given this thread so

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted for a digital brain. Hi Quentin, OK, but could you elaborate on this statement? Is the

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 1:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Dear Bruno, Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them. COMP is the conjunction of Yes Doctor, the Church Thesis and Arithmetic Realism, correct? I am now not sure of the definition of

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 1:40 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Stephen did wrote that, not me... ;) 2012/2/28 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Dear Bruno, Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them.

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 2:38 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 1:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Dear Bruno, Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them. COMP is the conjunction of Yes Doctor, the Church Thesis and Arithmetic Realism,

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread meekerdb
On 2/28/2012 11:38 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 1:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Dear Bruno, Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them. COMP is the conjunction of Yes Doctor, the Church Thesis and Arithmetic Realism,

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted for a digital brain. What if you have two digital substitute brains? Do you become both

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread meekerdb
On 2/28/2012 11:48 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 2:38 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 1:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Dear Bruno, Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them. COMP is the conjunction of Yes

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread meekerdb
On 2/28/2012 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciauxallco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted for a digital brain. What if you have two

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Feb 28, 3:41 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: The implication of Comp is that there is no you.  You are an abstraction, a fiction, just another element in a model of the world. That's why I say comp has only a pseudo-1p conception of consciousness. It's not difficult to claim

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2012/2/28 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted for a digital brain. What if you

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2012/2/28 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net On 2/28/2012 10:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted for a digital brain. Hi Quentin, OK, but

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Feb 28, 5:15 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: the you before is no more. That's what I have been arguing all along. Yes, doctor = Yes, death. It's delightful that there will be a digital imposter/identical twin who believes that they are someone with the same qualities that I

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2012/2/28 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Feb 28, 5:15 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: the you before is no more. That's what I have been arguing all along. Yes, doctor = Yes, death. No... tell me where is the you of 1 second ago ? When I say no more.. I mean

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Feb 28, 6:10 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/2/28 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Feb 28, 5:15 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: the you before is no more. That's what I have been arguing all along. Yes, doctor = Yes, death. No... tell me

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 3:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciauxallco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from your POV) if your brain was substituted for a

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread Stephen P. King
On 2/28/2012 3:39 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 11:48 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Not so fast! Tegmark's argument only holds, if it can be experimentally verified that is, _only_ for ion transport based processes. Consider theexperimental evidence

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread meekerdb
On 2/28/2012 9:40 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 3:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Feb 28, 10:43 am, Quentin Anciauxallco...@gmail.com wrote: Comp substitute consciousness... such as you could not feel any difference (in your consciousness from

Re: COMP test (ontology of COMP)

2012-02-28 Thread meekerdb
On 2/28/2012 9:43 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 2/28/2012 3:39 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2012 11:48 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Not so fast! Tegmark's argument only holds, if it can be experimentally verified that is, _only_ for ion transport based processes. Consider theexperimental