Re: Re: Earthquakes
Hi Bruno Marchal What you say about evolution is probably true. But evolution (changes in dna) is not the critical problem. I was referring to the creation of life (dna), which absolutely must happen before it evolves. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/18/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-18, 07:31:25 Subject: Re: Earthquakes On 17 Aug 2012, at 19:49, Roger wrote: Hi Stephen P. King The possible only exists in this world given enough time. That is one practical argument against the creation of life in a deterministic world. Some say 19 billion years of random constructions isn't enough. But evolution is not 19 billion years of random constructions. It might even be just one day of random construction. The day when the first universal self-replicating molecules appears together with a simple program, like the iteration of z := z^2 + 1 (z complex number(*)). I use z := z^2 +1, which is basically the algorithm to generate the Mandelbrot set, just to illustrate that a very simple program (less than 1K) can generate something having a tremendous complex appearance. Look for example at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G6uO7ZHtK8 or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0nmVUU_7IQ In fact life is everything but random. It has many chaotic features, like the Mandelbrot set, but that is not randomness, even if it can look quite like randomness. Nobody fucks woman randomly, you know. It is a more complex process. Bruno Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-14, 23:17:02 Subject: Re: Earthquakes On 8/14/2012 7:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote: On 8/14/2012 10:45 AM, Roger wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Leibniz' best possible world is a conjecture based on L's two worlds of logic: 1) There is logic that is either always true or false, called the logic of reason or necessity. One could call this theory 2) The logic of contingency, also called the logic of fact, experimental result, or praxis, which can be true or false -- depending on the perfection of the entity or the time of occurrence. actuality Most people who acccuse God of injustice or unfairness by a supposedly loving God confuse theory with actuality. Earthquakes do occur because the world has imperfections or cracks ior the cointinental plaes don't fit perfectly together. And any fact must be that way for a reason, the reason also may be contingent, etc. up the line. Everything that is possible demands to exist. -- Leibniz If everything possible exists (in Plato's heaven / the omniscient mind of God) then so do all universes, all possible histories, all possible observations and experiences, all points of view, all traces of the execution of all programs, etc. Thus, if God is omniscient, he can't help the fact that bad things happen. Jason Hi Jason, Yes, all that is necessarily possible exists. This makes existence neutral and having nothing to do with anything else. Properties arise from partitioning portions of what exists against each other. Properties, like truth values and locations, are not a priori. They are contextual and thus contingent. Existence is not contingent on anything other than raw necessary possibility. -- Onward! Stephen Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. ~ Francis Bacon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: Earthquakes
Hi Jason Resch Right. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Jason Resch Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-14, 19:37:15 Subject: Re: Earthquakes On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote: On 8/14/2012 10:45 AM, Roger wrote: Hi Stephen P. King ? Leibniz' best possible world is a conjecture based on L's two worlds of logic: ? 1) There is logic that is either always true or false, called the logic of reason or necessity. One could call this theory ? 2) The logic of contingency, also called the logic of fact,?xperimental result,? ???r praxis, which can be true or false -- depending on the perfection? of the entity ??or the time of occurrence.?actuality ? Most people who acccuse God of injustice or unfairness by a supposedly loving God confuse theory with actuality. Earthquakes do occur because the world has imperfections or? cracks ior the cointinental plaes don't fit perfectly together. ? And any fact must be that way for a reason, the reason also may be contingent, etc. up the line. ? Everything that is possible demands to exist. -- Leibniz If everything possible exists (in Plato's heaven / the omniscient mind of God) then so do all universes, all possible histories, all possible observations and experiences, all points of view, all traces of the execution of all programs, etc. ?hus, if God is omniscient, he can't help the fact that bad things happen. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: Earthquakes
Hi Stephen P. King That free will is consistent with a deterministic universe is the compatibilist point of view. There is also the opposite, the non-compatibilist p.o.v. They're both logical, given their different assumptions or posings of the issue. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-14, 15:07:28 Subject: Re: Earthquakes On 8/14/2012 10:45 AM, Roger wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Leibniz' best possible world is a conjecture based on L's two worlds of logic: 1) There is logic that is either always true or false, called the logic of reason or necessity. One could call this theory 2) The logic of contingency, also called the logic of fact, experimental result, or praxis, which can be true or false -- depending on the perfection of the entity or the time of occurrence. actuality Most people who acccuse God of injustice or unfairness by a supposedly loving God confuse theory with actuality. Earthquakes do occur because the world has imperfections or cracks ior the cointinental plaes don't fit perfectly together. And any fact must be that way for a reason, the reason also may be contingent, etc. up the line. Dear Roger, The best possible world that we have is only the one that is mutually consistent for the collections of mutually interacting (and thus communicating) observers (which we are a member of). All other features and valuations are not any kind of optimum other than the result of our collective choices. This is how free will is compatible with a deterministic physical universe. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/14/2012 - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-12, 14:05:46 Subject: Re: pre-established harmony Hi Roger, I will interleave some remarks. On 8/11/2012 7:37 AM, Roger wrote: Hi Stephen P. King As I understand it, Leibniz's pre-established harmony is analogous to a musical score with God, or at least some super-intelligence, as composer/conductor. Allow me to use the analogy a bit more but carefully to not go too far. This musical score, does it require work of some kind to be created itself? This prevents all physical particles from colliding, instead they all move harmoniously together*. The score was composed before the Big Bang-- my own explanation is like Mozart God or that intelligence could hear the whole (symphony) beforehand in his head. I argue that the Pre-Established Harmony (PEH) requires solving an NP-Complete computational problem that has an infinite number of variables. Additionally, it is not possible to maximize or optimize more than one variable in a multivariate system. Unless we are going to grant God the ability to contradict mathematical facts, which, I argue, is equivalent to granting violations of the basis rules of non-contradiction, then God would have to run an eternal computation prior to the creation of the Universe. This is absurd! How can the existence of something have a beginning if it requires an an infinite problem to be solved first? Here is the problem: Computations require resources to run, and if resources are not available then there is no way to claim access to the information that would be in the solution that the computation would generate. WE might try to get around this problem the way that Bruno does by stipulating that the truth of the solution gives it existence, but the fact that some mathematical statement or sigma_1 sentence is true (in the prior sense) does not allow it to be considered as accessible for use for other things. For example, we could make valid claims about the content of a meteor that no one has examined but we cannot have any certainty about those claims unless we actually crack open the rock and physically examine its contents. The state of the universe as moving harmoniously together was not exactly what the PEH was for Leibniz. It was the synchronization of the simple actions of the Monads. It was a coordination of the percepts that make up the monads such that, for example, my monadic percept of living in a world that you also live in is synchronized with your monadic view of living in a world that I also live in such that we can be said to have this email chat. Remember, Monads (as defined in the Monadology) have no windows and cannot be considered to either exchange substances nor are embedded in a common medium that can exchange excitations. The entire common world of appearances emerges from and could be said to supervene upon the synchronization of internal (1p subjective) Monadic actions. I argue that the only way that God could find a solution to the NP-Complete problem is to make the creation of the universe simulataneous
Re: Re: Earthquakes
Hi Stephen P. King The possible only exists in this world given enough time. That is one practical argument against the creation of life in a deterministic world. Some say 19 billion years of random constructions isn't enough. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-14, 23:17:02 Subject: Re: Earthquakes On 8/14/2012 7:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote: On 8/14/2012 10:45 AM, Roger wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Leibniz' best possible world is a conjecture based on L's two worlds of logic: 1) There is logic that is either always true or false, called the logic of reason or necessity. One could call this theory 2) The logic of contingency, also called the logic of fact, experimental result, or praxis, which can be true or false -- depending on the perfection of the entity or the time of occurrence. actuality Most people who acccuse God of injustice or unfairness by a supposedly loving God confuse theory with actuality. Earthquakes do occur because the world has imperfections or cracks ior the cointinental plaes don't fit perfectly together. And any fact must be that way for a reason, the reason also may be contingent, etc. up the line. Everything that is possible demands to exist. -- Leibniz If everything possible exists (in Plato's heaven / the omniscient mind of God) then so do all universes, all possible histories, all possible observations and experiences, all points of view, all traces of the execution of all programs, etc. Thus, if God is omniscient, he can't help the fact that bad things happen. Jason Hi Jason, Yes, all that is necessarily possible exists. This makes existence neutral and having nothing to do with anything else. Properties arise from partitioning portions of what exists against each other. Properties, like truth values and locations, are not a priori. They are contextual and thus contingent. Existence is not contingent on anything other than raw necessary possibility. -- Onward! Stephen Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. ~ Francis Bacon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
