Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-02-22 Thread Stephen Paul King
] To: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 6:04 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:46:17AM -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Again, that does not work because we can not take space-time (ala GR

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-02-22 Thread Russell Standish
King [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 6:04 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:46:17AM -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Again, that does not work because we can not take space-time (ala GR

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-02-22 Thread Stephen Paul King
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 11:22 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 10:33:37PM -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Russel, The reference page is about the necessary resources for quantum computation

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-02-22 Thread Stephen Paul King
... Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 11:39 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? Dear Russel, Does this quantum

Re: [issues] Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-02-22 Thread Stephen Paul King
PM Subject: [issues] Re: Is the universe computable? Dear Russell, Let me add that I do not think that it is sufficient to embed space-time in Hilbert space, we also need some way of explaining how space-time phenomena acts on the Hilbert space's vectors. The infamous back-action

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-02-02 Thread Stephen Paul King
own when we consider finite comp systems. Am I making any sense so far? Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal To: Stephen Paul King ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:48 AM Subject:

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-30 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Stephen, [SPK] No, Bruno, I like Comp, I like it a LOT! I just wish that it had a support that was stronger than the one that you propose ... [BM] Where do I give a support to comp? I don't remember. No doubt that I am fascinated by its consequences, and that I appreciate the so deep

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-28 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 17:12 27/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Kory and Hal, Kory's idea strongly reminds me of the basic idea explored by John Cramer in his Interactional interpretation in that it takes into account both past and future states. Please see:

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-28 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 11:57 27/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Thank you for this post. It gives me a chance to reintroduce one problem that I have with your model. Like you, I am very interested in comments from others, as it could very well be that I am misunderstanding some subtle detail of your

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-28 Thread Stephen Paul King
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 9:27 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 11:57 27/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Thank you for this post. It gives me a chance to reintroduce one problem that I have with your model. Like you, I am very interested

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-28 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/27/04, Hal Finney wrote: One way to approach an answer to the question is to ask, is there such a CA in which a universal computer can be constructed? That would be evidence for at least a major prerequisite for conscious observations. Do you have any examples like this? In my opinion,

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-27 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/26/04, Stephen Paul King wrote: The modern incarnation of this is the so-called 4D cube model of the universe. Again, these ideas only work for those who are willing to completely ignore the facts of computational complexity and the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle. I think you and I are

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Kory, Hi Stephen, Hi All, At 01:19 27/01/04 -0500, Kory Heath wrote: At 1/26/04, Stephen Paul King wrote: The modern incarnation of this is the so-called 4D cube model of the universe. Again, these ideas only work for those who are willing to completely ignore the facts of computational

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-27 Thread Stephen Paul King
Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 10:46 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable Hi Kory, Hi Stephen, Hi All, I understand Kory very well and believe he argues correctly in this post with respect to Stephen.B

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-27 Thread Hal Finney
Kory Heath writes: Forget about our own (potentially non-computable) universe for a second. Surely you agree that we can imagine some large-but-finite 3+1D CA (it doesn't have to be anything like our own universe) in which the state of each bit is dependent on the states of neighboring bits

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-27 Thread Stephen Paul King
, January 27, 2004 1:33 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable Kory Heath writes: Forget about our own (potentially non-computable) universe for a second. Surely you agree that we can imagine some large-but-finite 3+1D CA (it doesn't have to be anything like our own universe) in which

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-26 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Kory, Interleaving below. - Original Message - From: Kory Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 2:54 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 1/24/04, Stephen Paul King wrote: I should respond to Kory's ME == PE idea. In PE

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-26 Thread CMR
The problem is that there is a large class of physical systems that are not computable by TMs, i.e., they are intractable. Did you read the Wolfram quote that I included in one of my posts? Please read the entire article found here: Another way of thinking of this is to concider the

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-25 Thread Stephen Paul King
- Original Message - From: John Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 6:02 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable - Original Message - From: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-25 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Jesse, - Original Message - From: Jesse Mazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 9:45 PM Subject: RE: Is the universe computable? David Barrett-Lennard wrote: Georges Quenot wrote: Also I feel some confusion between the questions

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-24 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Bruno, Interleaving. - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 9:42 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable Dear Stephen, At 12:39 21/01/04

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-23 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Stephen, At 12:39 21/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno and Kory, Interleaving. - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 9:21 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 02:50 21/01/04

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-22 Thread John Collins
- Original Message - From: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 5:39 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable SPK wrote: You are confussing the postential existence of a computation

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-22 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Is the universe computable At 1/21/04, David Barrett-Lennard wrote: Saying that the probability that a given integer is even is 0.5 seems intuitively to me and can be made precise (see my last post). We can say with precision that a certain sequence

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/19/04, Stephen Paul King wrote: Were and when is the consideration of the physical resources required for the computation going to obtain? Is my question equivalent to the old first cause question? The view that Mathematical Existence == Physical Existence implies that physical resources

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 10:33:57PM -0800, CMR wrote: Yes! you've captured the gist and fleshed out the raw concept that hit me whilst reading your post on weightless computation; that's potentially the value of it as an avenue to explore, I think: that there is an

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/21/04, David Barrett-Lennard wrote: Saying that the probability that a given integer is even is 0.5 seems intuitively to me and can be made precise (see my last post). We can say with precision that a certain sequence of rational numbers (generated by looking at larger and larger finite sets

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 02:50 21/01/04 -0500, Kory Heath wrote: At 1/19/04, Stephen Paul King wrote: Were and when is the consideration of the physical resources required for the computation going to obtain? Is my question equivalent to the old first cause question? The view that Mathematical Existence == Physical

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread John M
not request acceptance. My 'narrative'. John Mikes - Original Message - From: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:39 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Where and when

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-21 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear CMR, Interleaving. - Original Message - From: CMR [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:07 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? Think of it this way, what is the cardinality of the equivalence class

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread CMR
Greetings Eugen While it is not possible to infer physics of the metalayer, it is possible to infer the number of bits necessary to encode this universe. I'm familiar with the concept of a metalayer in software dev as a compatibility interface between apps etc.. So, in this case the meta-layer

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Bruno and Kory, Interleaving. - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 9:21 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 02:50 21/01/04 -0500, Kory Heath wrote: At 1/19/04, Stephen Paul King wrote

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-21 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 09:34:50AM -0800, CMR wrote: I'm familiar with the concept of a metalayer in software dev as a compatibility interface between apps etc.. So, in this case the meta-layer being I assume the interface between the universes abstractly and between the simulation and the

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
- Original Message - From: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 12:23 PM Subject: RE: Is the universe computable Kory Heath wrote: At 1/18/04, Hal Finney wrote: Now consider all possible program tapes being run at the same time, perhaps

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Bruno, Interleaving. - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 5:55 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable Dear Stephen, At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Hal, and Friends

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Hal Finney
At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Where and when is the consideration of the physical resources required for the computation going to obtain? Is my question equivalent to the old first cause question? Anything physical is by definition within a universe (by my definition,

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
, Stephen - Original Message - From: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:39 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Where and when is the consideration of the physical resources

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
The fact that an Algorithm is independent of any particular implementation is not reducible to the idea that Algorithms (or Numbers, or White Rabbits, etc.) can exist without some REAL resources being used in their implementation (and maybe some kind of thermodynamics). To paraphrase

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Pete Carlton
The following thought experiment might provoke some intuitions on this question.. Imagine a Life universe that contains, among other things, two SASes talking to each other (and showing each other pictures, and in general having a very lucid, conscious, conversation.) Imagine that instead of

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear CMR, - Original Message - From: CMR [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 5:19 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable [SPK previous] The fact that an Algorithm is independent of any particular implementation is not reducible

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Hal Finney
Pete Carlton writes: Imagine a Life universe that contains, among other things, two SASes talking to each other (and showing each other pictures, and in general having a very lucid, conscious, conversation.) Imagine that instead of being implemented on a computer, it's implemented by a

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
Greetings Stephen, BTW, have you ever read about the Maxwell Demon? Being partial to the information physical view; not only have I read it, I also account for it by viewing a system's information as physical. So by inference should then I be viewing the mapping of the intra and extra universal

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
Greetings Pete, If not, then can you say what it is about the active process of flipping or laying down that counts as computation but does not count when the stack is a static block? I suppose I'm ultimately in the hard info physics camp, in that the pattern's the thing; given the 2ds and

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Hal Finney
CMR writes: Then question then becomes, I suppose, if in fact our universe is a digital one (if not strictly a CA) havng self-consistent emergent physics, then might it not follow that it is implemented (run?) via some extra-universal physical processes that only indirectly correspond to ours?

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear CMR, - Original Message - From: CMR [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 6:46 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? Greetings Stephen, BTW, have you ever read about the Maxwell Demon? Being partial to the information physical view

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Stephen Paul King
these two arguments together, what do we get? See: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0304128 ;-) Stephen - Original Message - From: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 7:18 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable CMR writes: Then question

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
the probability that an integer is even is 0.5, or the probability that an integer is a perfect square is 0. - David -Original Message- From: Hal Finney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 20 January 2004 1:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Is the universe computable Kory Heath

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/19/04, Hal Finney wrote: However, here is an alternate formulation of my argument which seems to be roughly equivalent and which avoids this objection: create a random program tape by flipping a coin for each bit. Now the probability that you created the first program above is 1/2^100, and

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread Jesse Mazer
Kory Heath wrote: At 1/19/04, Hal Finney wrote: However, here is an alternate formulation of my argument which seems to be roughly equivalent and which avoids this objection: create a random program tape by flipping a coin for each bit. Now the probability that you created the first program above

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
Kory said... At 1/21/04, David Barrett-Lennard wrote: This allows us to say the probability that an integer is even is 0.5, or the probability that an integer is a perfect square is 0. But can't you use this same logic to show that the cardinality of the even integers is half that of the

Re: [issues] Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread James N Rose
PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:39 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable At 13:19 19/01/04 -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote: Where and when is the consideration of the physical resources required for the computation going to obtain? Is my question

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
Think of it this way, what is the cardinality of the equivalence class of representations R of, say, a 1972 Jaguar XKE, varying over *all possible languages* and *symbol systems*? I think it is at least equal to the Reals. Is this correct? If R has more than one member, how can we

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-20 Thread CMR
And what does it say about the physical properties which are necessary for computation? We have energy; Life has blinkiness (the degree to which cells are blinking on and off within a structure); neither property has a good analog in the other universe. Does the real universe win, in terms

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-19 Thread Hal Finney
David Barrett-Lennard writes: Why is it assumed that a multiple runs makes any difference to the measure? One reason I like this assumption is that it provides a natural reason for simpler universes to have greater measure than more complex ones. Imagine a Turing machine with an infinite

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-19 Thread Kory Heath
At 1/18/04, Hal Finney wrote: Now consider all possible program tapes being run at the same time, perhaps on an infinite ensemble of (virtual? abstract?) machines. Of those, a fraction of 1 in 2^100 of those tapes will start with that 100 bit sequence for the program in question. [snip] Now

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-19 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 17:36 16/01/04 +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: On Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 02:28:27PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: of brain and the like. I of course respect completely that opinion; but I point on the fact that once you make the computationnalist hypothesis then it is the reverse which becomes

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-19 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 15:05 16/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Possibly making you not better than them. But this not that simple. They do not disagree with dialog and argumentation. Rather they argue in different ways and/or with different premises. OK, so I perhaps did not understand you fully. I thought they

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-19 Thread George Levy
I find it hard to believe that the measure of a program/book/movie/experience is proportional to the number it is executed/read/seen/lived, independently of everything else. I have an alternative proposition: Measure is a function of how accessible a particular program/book/movie/experience

RE: Is the universe computable

2004-01-18 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is the universe computable Eugen Leitl: I have trouble alternating between the internal and the external observer view. So we have a machine crunching bits, sequentially falling from state to state. This spans a continous trajectory. We can make a full record

RE: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-17 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
Eugen said... I was using a specific natural number (a 512 bit integer) as an example for creation and destruction of a specific integer (an instance of a class of integers). No more, no less. That's plenty to bring out our difference of opinion. cf creation and destruction of a specific

Re: Is the universe computable

2004-01-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 17:13 14/01/04 +, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: Please correct me if I am wrong: Bruno believes that information, for example mathematical concepts and theorems, exist independently of their encoding in some physicsl systems (arithmetic realism); in other words, that the number 4 esists

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 17:13 14/01/04 +, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: Please correct me if I am wrong: Bruno believes that information, for example mathematical concepts and theorems, exist independently of their encoding in some physicsl systems (arithmetic realism); in other words, that the number 4 esists

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-16 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM +0800, David Barrett-Lennard wrote: I agree with everything you say, but did you really think I was making a point because Eugen happened to use hex?! I've fallen behind on answering my email, so sorry if this is brief and a bit out of context. This post is

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-16 Thread Georges Quenot
Bruno Marchal wrote: At 10:14 13/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Some people do argue that there is no arithmetical property independent of us because there is no thing on which they would apply independentkly of us. What we would call their arithmetical properties is simply a set of

Re: Re:Is the universe computable?

2004-01-15 Thread Eric Cavalcanti
- Original Message - From: David Barrett-Lennard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xf2f75022aa10b5ef6c69f2f59f34b03e26cb5bdb467eec82780 didn't exist in this universe (with a very high probability, it being a 512 bit number, generated from physical system noise) before I've generated it. Now it

RE: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-15 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
Hi Eric, 0xf2f75022aa10b5ef6c69f2f59f34b03e26cb5bdb467eec82780 didn't exist in this universe (with a very high probability, it being a 512 bit number, generated from physical system noise) before I've generated it. Now it exists (currently, as a hex string (not necessarily ASCII) on

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 10:38:51AM +0800, David Barrett-Lennard wrote: You seem to be getting a little hot under the collar! Nope, just a bit polemic. I was getting tired of glib assertions, and needed to poke a stick, to find out what's underneath. Here is a justification of why I think

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread Bruno Marchal
I agree with you Ben, you make a point. My objection admits indeed your wonderful generalization. Thanks. Bruno At 11:07 13/01/04 -0500, Benjamin Udell wrote: [Georges Quenot]Some people do argue that there is no arithmetical property independent of us because there is no thing on which they

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Georges, I got that mail before. And I did answer it. Are you sure you send the right mail? see http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m5026.html Bruno At 10:14 13/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: At 13:36 09/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote:

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 12:22:13PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: Indeed I wasn't. In general I don't like to much argue on hypotheses. I just say lots of stuff. I don't mean it. Please attach no significance to what I say; it's just hot air. Also, I don't like to repeat to much arguments, so,

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread John M
Jesse wrote: (- Original Message - From: Jesse Mazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 4:02 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable?) Hal Finney wrote: Snip As long as everything that happens in the universe's history can be represented

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread Giu1i0 Pri5c0
Please correct me if I am wrong: Bruno believes that information, for example mathematical concepts and theorems, exist independently of their encoding in some physicsl systems (arithmetic realism); in other words, that the number 4 esists independently of the presence in the physical world of

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-14 Thread Jesse Mazer
Eugen Leitl wrote: David Barrett-Lennard wrote: Here is a justification of why I think arithmetical realism is at least very plausible... I'm all ears. Let's suppose that a computer simulation can (in principle) exhibit awareness. I don't know whether you dispute this hypothesis, but let's

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi John, At 10:39 12/01/04 -0500, John M wrote: Bruno, in the line you touched with 'numbers: I was arguing on another list 'pro' D.Bohm's there are no numbers in nature position ... But what is nature ? I have never said that numbers exist in nature. The word nature or the word universe are

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 12:24:07PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: If I'd kill you, you'd have no chance of thinking that thought. Actually this is pure wishful thinking, unless you mean succeeding I was referring to a gedanken experiment, of course. to kill me and my counterparts in some

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 14:08 13/01/04 +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: you be able to do a thing like that. I will not insist on this startling consequence of COMP or QM, giving that you postulate physicalism at the start. See my thesis for a proof that physicalism is incompatible with comp. We have discuss the

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 10:14 13/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Some people do argue that there is no arithmetical property independent of us because there is no thing on which they would apply independentkly of us. What we would call their arithmetical properties is simply a set of tautologies that do come with

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Benjamin Udell
[Georges Quenot]Some people do argue that there is no arithmetical property independent of us because there is no thing on which they would apply independentkly of us. What we would call their arithmetical properties is simply a set of tautologies that do come with them when they are considered

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 03:03:38PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: What is the point? Do we have experimental procedure to validate the opposite of the fanciful scenario? Giving that we were talking about I see, we're at the prove that the Moon is not made from green cheese when nobody is looking

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Georges Quenot
Wei Dai wrote: On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 05:32:05PM +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Many other way of simulating the universe could be considered like for instance a 4D mesh (if we simplify by considering only general relativity; there is no reason for the approach not being possible in an

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 05:30:10PM +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: No. They actually came to me while I was figuring some other ways of simulating a universe than the sequential one that seemed to give rise to many problems to me. The second one is influenced What's your take on how subjective

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Hal Finney
Georges Quenot writes: I do not believe in either case that a simulation with this level of detail can be conducted on any computer that can be built in our universe (I mean a computer able to simulate a universe containing a smaller computer doing the calculation you considered with a level

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Georges Quenot
Bruno Marchal wrote: At 13:36 09/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: It seems, but it isn't. Well, actually I have known *one* mathematician, (a russian logician) who indeed makes a serious try to develop some mathematics without that infinite act of faith (I

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Jesse Mazer
Hal Finney wrote: Suppose we sought to construct a consistent history of such a CA system by first starting with purely random values at each point in space and time. Now, obviously this arrangement will not satisfy the CA rules. But then we go through and start modifying things locally so as to

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Hal Finney
Jesse Mazer wrote: Hal Finney wrote: Suppose we sought to construct a consistent history of such a CA system by first starting with purely random values at each point in space and time. Now, obviously this arrangement will not satisfy the CA rules. But then we go through and start modifying

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread Stephen Paul King
Dear Wei, Georges, et al, Where does the notion of computational resources factor in this? Stephen - Original Message - From: Wei Dai [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Georges Quenot [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 8:50 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe

RE: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-13 Thread David Barrett-Lennard
. (egg = number theory, chicken = objects and observers). Both come together and can't be pulled apart. - David -Original Message- From: Eugen Leitl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2004 1:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is the universe computable

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 15:42 09/01/04 -0500, Jesse Mazer wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: I don't think the word universe is a basic term. It is a sort or deity for atheist. All my work can be seen as an attempt to mak it more palatable in the comp frame. Tegmark, imo, goes in the right direction, but seems unaware of

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 13:36 09/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: It seems, but it isn't. Well, actually I have known *one* mathematician, (a russian logician) who indeed makes a serious try to develop some mathematics without that infinite act of faith (I don't recall its name for the

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 03:50:42PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: What I mean is that their arithmetical property are independent of us. Do you think those people believe that the proposition 17 is prime is meaningless without a human in the neighborhood? Of course it is meaningless. Natural

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 16:02 12/01/04 +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 03:50:42PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: What I mean is that their arithmetical property are independent of us. Do you think those people believe that the proposition 17 is prime is meaningless without a human in the

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 04:18:56PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: Natural numbers are not representation. They are the one represented, for exemples by infosystems, or pebbles, animals etc. They are the one represented is a yet another assertion. I would be more inclined to listen, if you'd show

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread John M
Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 9:50 AM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? At 13:36 09/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: It seems, but it isn't. Well, actually I have known *one* mathematician

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-12 Thread Wei Dai
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 05:32:05PM +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Many other way of simulating the universe could be considered like for instance a 4D mesh (if we simplify by considering only general relativity; there is no reason for the approach not being possible in an even more general way)

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-10 Thread John M
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John M [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 7:33 PM Subject: Re: Is the universe computable? to your series of questions I would like to add one as first: What do you call universe? i think this question is most temporally cognitively

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-09 Thread Georges Quenot
Norman Samish : Max Tegmark, at http://207.70.190.98/toe.pdf, published in Annals of Physics, 270, 1-51 (1998), postulates that all structures that exist mathematically exist also physically. Max Tegmark postulated or conjectured even more in that paper: that the distinction between

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-09 Thread Georges Quenot
Bruno Marchal wrote: At 11:34 08/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: I am very willing (maybe too much, that's part of the problem) to accept a Platonic existence for *the* integers. I am far from sure however that this does not involve a significant amount of faith. Indeed. It needs an

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-09 Thread Georges Quenot
Hal Finney wrote: Georges Quenot writes: I would be interested in reading the opinions of the participants about that point and about the sense that could be given to the question of what happens (in the simulated universe) in any non- synchronous simulation when the simulation diverges

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-09 Thread Georges Quenot
John M wrote: [...] If you consider (the) (your) universe, something according to YOUR current intuition what YOU have of it, then there is nothing else upon which you can simulate it. You definitely need something ELSE on which a simluation can be based. More than just your intuition-based

Re: Is the universe computable?

2004-01-09 Thread Bruno Marchal
At 09:45 09/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: At 11:34 08/01/04 +0100, Georges Quenot wrote: I am very willing (maybe too much, that's part of the problem) to accept a Platonic existence for *the* integers. I am far from sure however that this does not involve a

  1   2   >