On 3/8/2011 10:55 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 8, 6:48 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/8/2011 9:36 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 8, 4:45 pm, Brent Meekerwrote:
On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
Up to a point. But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
On Mar 8, 6:48 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/8/2011 9:36 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 8, 4:45 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> >> On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
> Up to a point. But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
>
> > this world the BIV would no longer be a
On 3/8/2011 9:36 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 8, 4:45 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
Up to a point. But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
this world the BIV would no longer be able to process them. We casually
talk of "white rabb
On 3/8/2011 9:36 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 8, 4:45 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
Up to a point. But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
this world the BIV would no longer be able to process them. We casually
talk of "white rabb
On Mar 8, 4:45 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Up to a point. But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
> >> > this world the BIV would no longer be able to process them. We casually
> >> > talk of "white rabbits" on this list, which are perf
On 3/8/2011 6:21 AM, 1Z wrote:
Up to a point. But if the faking deviated very far from perceptions of
> this world the BIV would no longer be able to process them. We casually
> talk of "white rabbits" on this list, which are perfectly understandable
> things and are really of this world (e.
On Mar 8, 12:46 am, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/7/2011 4:15 PM, 1Z wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 8:28 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> >> On 3/7/2011 12:01 PM, 1Z wrote:
>
> >>> On Mar 7, 6:29 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> > On 06 Mar 2011, at
On 07 Mar 2011, at 19:29, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious of
any
> world except the virtual world of the MG, which is
On 3/7/2011 4:15 PM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 7, 8:28 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/7/2011 12:01 PM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 7, 6:29 pm, Brent Meekerwrote:
On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
On Mar 7, 8:28 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/7/2011 12:01 PM, 1Z wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 6:29 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> >> On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> >>> On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
> >> The way I see it th
On 3/7/2011 12:01 PM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 7, 6:29 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious o
On Mar 7, 6:29 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> >> On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
> The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious of any
> > world except the virtual world
On 3/7/2011 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious of any
> world except the virtual world of the MG, which is to say not conscious
> at all in our terms. It cou
On Mar 6, 7:21 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
> >> The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious of any
> >> > world except the virtual world of the MG, which is to say not conscious
> >> > at all in our terms. It could, provided enough environment a
On 06 Mar 2011, at 20:21, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious of any
> world except the virtual world of the MG, which is to say not
conscious
> at all in our terms. It could, provided enough environment and
Bru
On 3/6/2011 5:07 AM, 1Z wrote:
The way I see it the MG consciousness would not be conscious of any
> world except the virtual world of the MG, which is to say not conscious
> at all in our terms. It could, provided enough environment and Bruno
> emphasizes the UD will provide an arbitrarily l
On 06 Mar 2011, at 14:03, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 6:29 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2011, at 15:13, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Mar 2011, at 18:39, 1Z wrote:
If you have a UDA inside a physical universe,
I guess you mean "a UD inside a physical un
On 05 Mar 2011, at 22:50, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/5/2011 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> If you still don't see this, ask for clarification of the
sane04
> pa
On Mar 6, 4:17 am, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/5/2011 4:04 PM, Pzomby wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 5, 1:50 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> >> On 3/5/2011 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> >>> On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
> > On Mar 4, 7:5
On Mar 4, 6:29 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 04 Mar 2011, at 15:13, 1Z wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >> On 03 Mar 2011, at 18:39, 1Z wrote:
>
> >>> If you have a UDA inside a physical universe,
>
> >> I guess you mean "a UD inside a physical universe".
>
> >> UD
On 3/5/2011 4:04 PM, Pzomby wrote:
On Mar 5, 1:50 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/5/2011 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchalwrote:
On Mar 5, 1:50 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 3/5/2011 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> >> On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
>
> >>> On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> >>>
> > If you still don't see this, ask for clari
On 3/5/2011 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> If you still don't see this, ask for clarification of the sane04
> paper(*), because it seems to me that the first sev
On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> If you still don't see this, ask for clarification of the
sane04
> paper(*), because it seems to me that the first seven steps are
rather
> clear, there. You
On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 03 Mar 2011, at 18:39, 1Z wrote:
>
> > If you have a UDA inside a physical universe,
>
> I guess you mean "a UD inside a physical universe".
>
> UDA is for the UD-Argument. The Universal Doveta
On 04 Mar 2011, at 15:13, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Mar 2011, at 18:39, 1Z wrote:
If you have a UDA inside a physical universe,
I guess you mean "a UD inside a physical universe".
UDA is for the UD-Argument. The Universal Dovetailer Argument.
there is r
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 03 Mar 2011, at 18:39, 1Z wrote:
>
> > If you have a UDA inside a physical universe,
>
> I guess you mean "a UD inside a physical universe".
>
> UDA is for the UD-Argument. The Universal Dovetailer Argument.
>
> > there is real physics
> > (qua physi
On 03 Mar 2011, at 18:39, 1Z wrote:
If you have a UDA inside a physical universe,
I guess you mean "a UD inside a physical universe".
UDA is for the UD-Argument. The Universal Dovetailer Argument.
there is real physics
(qua physicalevents)
outside it, and there is a real study of physi
If you have a UDA inside a physical universe, there is real physics
(qua physicalevents)
outside it, and there is a real study of physics outside it as well.
What goes on in a
virtualised environment is not real. You could feed virtualised people
false information
about the past, but that would not
29 matches
Mail list logo
