Re: UDA paper
Hi Torgny, Le 29-févr.-08, à 15:25, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : Bruno Marchal skrev: Hi Wei, I have not succeeded to upload the movie, nor do I have seen files which I heard should have been already uploaded by people on the list. The system complains that I am not a member of the list. I will try again Monday, because it looks like the discussion are not currently available too, so the problem is perhaps with the Googlegroups. But if that works it is of course the good idea, thanks, I have just tested to upload a file to the group (PofSTorgny1.doc). You can try to see if you can see that file. (You have to log in to Google groups first.) I see (and did print) your file. I have put the movie there, in two version but I cannot retrieve it. With the first I get the code, and with the other (the one with .mpeg) I get the QuickTime logo with an interrogation mark. If you or someone can see the movie from there, just tell me. Best, Bruno 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Bruno Marchal skrev: Hi Torgny, Le 29-févr.-08, à 15:25, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : I have just tested to upload a file to the group (PofSTorgny1.doc). You can try to see if you can see that file. (You have to log in to Google groups first.) I see (and did print) your file. I have put the movie there, in two version but I cannot retrieve it. With the first I get the code, and with the other (the one with .mpeg) I get the QuickTime logo with an interrogation mark. If you or someone can see the movie from there, just tell me. I have not succeeded to view your movie. I have downloaded your files to my computer. But it seems as if your files are corrupted in some way. I have tried three different movie players (Windows Media Player, RealPlayer, and QuickTime), but no one was able to recognize your files. -- Torgny --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Thanks Torgny, I will do that. Meanwhile, I try to find the other movies. Bruno Le 29-févr.-08, à 15:25, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : Bruno Marchal skrev: Hi Wei, I have not succeeded to upload the movie, nor do I have seen files which I heard should have been already uploaded by people on the list. The system complains that I am not a member of the list. I will try again Monday, because it looks like the discussion are not currently available too, so the problem is perhaps with the Googlegroups. But if that works it is of course the good idea, thanks, I have just tested to upload a file to the group (PofSTorgny1.doc). You can try to see if you can see that file. (You have to log in to Google groups first.) -- Torgny Tholerus 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Hi Wei, I have not succeeded to upload the movie, nor do I have seen files which I heard should have been already uploaded by people on the list. The system complains that I am not a member of the list. I will try again Monday, because it looks like the discussion are not currently available too, so the problem is perhaps with the Googlegroups. But if that works it is of course the good idea, thanks, Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ - Le 27-févr.-08, à 20:46, Wei Dai a écrit : Bruno Marchal wrote: If Wei Dai agree, I could send it online: it is a 1,5 Mega QuickTime document attachment. I guess it is a bit too big. Some day I will put them on my web page. It does illustrate some points. The problem is that my all complex plane software does no more run on current computers. Bruno, you can upload it to http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list/files. 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Bruno Marchal skrev: Hi Wei, I have not succeeded to upload the movie, nor do I have seen files which I heard should have been already uploaded by people on the list. The system complains that I am not a member of the list. I will try again Monday, because it looks like the discussion are not currently available too, so the problem is perhaps with the Googlegroups. But if that works it is of course the good idea, thanks, I have just tested to upload a file to the group (PofSTorgny1.doc). You can try to see if you can see that file. (You have to log in to Google groups first.) -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Bruno Marchal wrote: If Wei Dai agree, I could send it online: it is a 1,5 Mega QuickTime document attachment. I guess it is a bit too big. Some day I will put them on my web page. It does illustrate some points. The problem is that my all complex plane software does no more run on current computers. Bruno, you can upload it to http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list/files. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Bruno,
my deepest sympathy to your computer-loss!!
it comes up frequently in my nightmares to have a similar 'catastrophe' on
my own and the desperation wakes me that I cannot recover my 'recent past'
before I have recovered it, like the lost eyeglasses what you cannot look
for until you found it.
I had one such deluge-loss of data, when the very first virus was loanched
in the 90s, I fell into it right before my wife warned me about such danger
as told in the actual News on TV.
I lost all my graphics - irrecoverably. Of course this is no consolation,
but you may have most of the material on other computers and on paper.
A terrible job and please, forgive my flippant remark on the recovery of
your 'unfinished' texts:
Have a Normal Hauptman read the recovered texts...-- I try to explain:
The Austria-Hungary War Ministry had a position of a Normal Hauptman
('average lieutenant') who's job was to READ all ordinances planned to be
sent to the troops. If he understood them and could tell what they said, it
was issued.
I do not volunteer for this position with you: find a smarter one...
Best wishes
John (too normal)
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Mirek Dobsicek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Bruno!
I wish you the best to you and to your girlfriend.
Thank you very much. I appreciate your wish.
offered to you through the windows, like it happened to a friend of
mine (and she threw the computer with!). I reassure you: I think that
was exceptional! Presently I am not so lucky because I have been break
in yesterday, and my home computer has been stolen with all the
attached devices including the main backup disk. I will have to rewrite
hundreds of unfinished papers... . Sorry to bother you with that,
actually.
Ohh, that is not good. I am sorry for you. Hopefully you can recover at
least parts of the most important things.
Sincerely,
Mirek
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Russell, Tom, Barry, Mirek, Thank you very much for your kind posts. Actually I am amazed by the quantity of backup I have done, and so it looks like I have recovered all the main professional things, including most non finished papers (and then I agree with Tom's wise remarks which make me not so sure that I am glad with recovering those unfinished works ... 'cause I have no reason to not finish them now, or I am must search some reason ...). It looks I have only loss the leisure private documents (recent pictures, private mails), and many movies I have done, but not all, of transformations in the complex plane illustrating universal computability in the complex plane. Of course it is never funny when unknown people put some mess in your stuff, but it is not so grave, and those first person happenings are relative. To thank you I send you one of those (remaining) movie at your personal address. If Wei Dai agree, I could send it online: it is a 1,5 Mega QuickTime document attachment. I guess it is a bit too big. Some day I will put them on my web page. It does illustrate some points. The problem is that my all complex plane software does no more run on current computers. Best, Bruno 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Hi John,
Le 25-févr.-08, à 15:02, John Mikes a écrit :
Bruno,
my deepest sympathy to your computer-loss!!
it comes up frequently in my nightmares to have a similar
'catastrophe' on my own and the desperation wakes me that I cannot
recover my 'recent past' before I have recovered it,
It sounds awful!
like the lost eyeglasses what you cannot look for until you found it.
I have often a similar problem: without my eyeglasses I cannot see them
... (unless they are infinitely far from me!)
I had one such deluge-loss of data, when the very first virus was
loanched in the 90s, I fell into it right before my wife warned
me about such danger as told in the actual News on TV.
I lost all my graphics - irrecoverably.
What a pity. Someone told me the story of an employee who has encoded
typed texts on a computer for four years without doing backup and then
it crashed! We often hear stories like that.
Of course this is no consolation, but you may have most of the
material on other computers and on paper.
Yes. I have just get a moment of panic for some important document of
the year 2002-2004, where I used a PC, but I found eventually that I
did have make a double backup home/university of that PC although I
hardly remember it. Before and after those years I was and still am
using a MAC.
Actually I was very glad with that PC except when I begun to be
attacked by viruses which have make me decide to come back on Mac. I
did never succeed to eliminate the viruses on that PC. Fortunately,
those viruses were not of the destructive type, only terribly annoying,
slowing down the machine a lot, and distracting with many irrelevant
messages.
A terrible job and please, forgive my flippant remark on the recovery
of your 'unfinished' texts:
Have a Normal Hauptman read the recovered texts...-- I try to
explain:
The Austria-Hungary War Ministry had a position of a Normal Hauptman
('average lieutenant') who's job was to READ all ordinances planned to
be sent to the troops. If he understood them and could tell what they
said, it was issued.
I do not volunteer for this position with you: find a smarter one...
Thanks for the idea.
Best regards,
Bruno
PS If you want I can send you the 1,5 mega complex-UD-movie, tell me
out-of-line (I don't want to take the risk of crashing your computer!).
In fact I am not sure it can go through because it could be that there
is a limitation access on the university band.
John (too normal)
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Mirek Dobsicek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi Bruno!
I wish you the best to you and to your girlfriend.
Thank you very much. I appreciate your wish.
offered to you through the windows, like it happened to a friend of
mine (and she threw the computer with!). I reassure you: I think
that
was exceptional! Presently I am not so lucky because I have been
break
in yesterday, and my home computer has been stolen with all the
attached devices including the main backup disk. I will have to
rewrite
hundreds of unfinished papers... . Sorry to bother you with that,
actually.
Ohh, that is not good. I am sorry for you. Hopefully you can recover
at
least parts of the most important things.
Sincerely,
Mirek
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Hi Bruno! I wish you the best to you and to your girlfriend. Thank you very much. I appreciate your wish. offered to you through the windows, like it happened to a friend of mine (and she threw the computer with!). I reassure you: I think that was exceptional! Presently I am not so lucky because I have been break in yesterday, and my home computer has been stolen with all the attached devices including the main backup disk. I will have to rewrite hundreds of unfinished papers... . Sorry to bother you with that, actually. Ohh, that is not good. I am sorry for you. Hopefully you can recover at least parts of the most important things. Sincerely, Mirek --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 03:32:28PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: Presently I am not so lucky because I have been break in yesterday, and my home computer has been stolen with all the attached devices including the main backup disk. I will have to rewrite hundreds of unfinished papers... . Sorry to bother you with that, actually. Have a super nice wedding, and take all the time you need to read the few papers I have finished, Bruno What a drag! Its one thing getting your computer stolen, but making off with the backup too is really cruel. I hope you can recover some things... Cheers -- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://www.hpcoders.com.au --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
On Feb 22, 7:32 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I reassure you: I think that was exceptional! Presently I am not so lucky because I have been break in yesterday, and my home computer has been stolen with all the attached devices including the main backup disk. I will have to rewrite hundreds of unfinished papers... . Sorry to bother you with that, actually. Have a super nice wedding, and take all the time you need to read the few papers I have finished, Bruno I'm also sorry to hear that, Bruno. Hundreds of unfinished papers! Whoa! Good and bad. Some mourning to do. Mourning is good. I just taught a lesson this morning on the Lamentations (in the old testament poetic writings). First step of restoration (getting back what was lost) is stepping back and taking a deep breath and accepting where we are now, accepting present reality. Then it is remembering the precious things. In your case it could be the precious kernels of gold in all your work that was lost. Mourning the loss, but celebrating that it was a loss that contained something that was very valuable, that you actually had something valuable in all of that, and no one can ever take that from you. You will probably find that the kernel has something to do with relationships: with other persons, with Truth. Third is to realize that we cannot restore our life/ strength/soul ourselves (this is where most of us get stuck a lot). Counter to the modern/reductionist approach, restoring what was lost does not depend on simply re-writing papers. It has to come from the Source of all. This can be an opportunity to remember (or find out in a new way) what really matters. A side note: it is interesting that in your pursuit of truth there is a lot that remains unfinished, it seems even more than what has been finished. I think this is a comment/tribute to your theories, that truth is found on the forever- unfinished border between the known and unknown. It is a journey! Take courage. And thanks for your contributions to our thinking. Tom --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Hi Mirek,
Le 20-févr.-08, à 16:24, Mirek Dobsicek a écrit :
yes, I am now a bit busy. Lecturing, seminars,.. wedding planning :-)
Waouh! Congratulation! I'm happy for you.
I am somewhere in the middle your paper. Regarding the very point of
the
described 1-indeterminancy, I have no problem there at all. Anyone who
ever called a fork() unix function (read, cut, duplicate) followed by
an
execve(read-destination-name-from-keyboard()) function, should not have
a problem here. A program, even with considerably good self-referential
skills, has no chance to know whether I will enter Warsaw or Moscow on
the keyboard.
Nice to hear that.
As I have said, I have not finished reading the paper yet. But sometime
I have a problem with a bit of feeling of circularity of arguments, or
described in better words, given assumptions A={..}, conjectures
B={...}
are true, where Bs feels like rephrased As, and therefore Bs are
trivially true. No disrespect here!
Not at all. I appreciate. Sometimes I have to explain lengthily that my
contribution is modest (even if a bit radical).
And not so original if you take into account that the comp-like
(platonist) conception of reality has been defended by many greek
intellectuals during a millenium, before being banished or murdered
like Hypatia.
It just how do I feel now. Bs are overwhelming, but As are pretty
strong
assumptions,
Well, at the same time, not so much. Most scientist believe (not always
consciously) in comp, and at the same time in some notion of *primary*
or *primitive* matter. They feel dizzy when they begin to understand
the incompatibility between comp and (weak) materialism. Sometimes comp
or mechanist philosophy is used by materialist to put the mind/body
problem under the rug, which explains why they dislike my work.
Sometimes it is even just political: they believe I am attacking Marx
or Lenine ...
The main contribution I have done (I think) is in the illustration that
by making comp sufficiently precise, some of the weirder aspect are
testable. Here the results shock many people among those who does not
know the current interpretation problem of QM. When I talked on
many-worlds in the seventies, it was enough to be put in the crackpot
category. I am sure many on the list have lived similar things.
so Bs are not surprising anymore, yet an hour later Bs are
overwhelming again.
Yes it is like that. Few people realise that comp *is* a very strong
assumption, even just Church thesis is already very strong, and has
many counter-intuitive consequences. This is not very well know too.
Best,
Mirek
I wish you the best to you and to your girlfriend. She is lucky, you
look serious. I hope your (future) wife will not trow the books she
offered to you through the windows, like it happened to a friend of
mine (and she threw the computer with!). I reassure you: I think that
was exceptional! Presently I am not so lucky because I have been break
in yesterday, and my home computer has been stolen with all the
attached devices including the main backup disk. I will have to rewrite
hundreds of unfinished papers... . Sorry to bother you with that,
actually.
Have a super nice wedding, and take all the time you need to read the
few papers I have finished,
Bruno
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Mirek,
I guess you are busy.
I would just like to insist that when I say (14-febr.-08):
Please note that the 1-indeterminacy I am talking about in the third
step is really a pure classical indeterminacy. It arises from the
fact
that my classical state is duplicable, and then I cannot predict
which
*experience* I will *feel* after a self-duplication: mainly
Washington
OR Moscow (or Sidney *or* Beijing), ...
This is really a key point, if not *the* key point. I think it is
almost trivial, but sometimes some people have a problem with this. In
that case it helps to imagine the same experiment done with some
inference inductive machine in place of a human or you, and this in
an iterated self-duplication. In that case the result amount to saying
that no robot, when duplicated iteratively (in Washington and Moscow,
say) can predict its future sequence of results of first person
self-localization. This becomes equivalent with the fact that most
finite bit-strings, like WMMMWWMWWWM ... are not compressible.
Someone told me (out-of-line) that he *can* predict with certainty his
future in that situation: for example he can predict W..., but
this means he is not taking into account the saying of the other
reconstituted people, which, *assuming comp* are genuine descendant
of the original. Those people will acknowledge that their
prediction
with certainty was false, and they have the same right and reason to
be taken seriously, again when we *assume* the comp hypothesis.
Have you a problem with this? I think most on this list grasp this
point, but don't hesitate to tell me
Re: UDA paper
Hi Mirek, I guess you are busy. I would just like to insist that when I say (14-febr.-08): Please note that the 1-indeterminacy I am talking about in the third step is really a pure classical indeterminacy. It arises from the fact that my classical state is duplicable, and then I cannot predict which *experience* I will *feel* after a self-duplication: mainly Washington OR Moscow (or Sidney *or* Beijing), ... This is really a key point, if not *the* key point. I think it is almost trivial, but sometimes some people have a problem with this. In that case it helps to imagine the same experiment done with some inference inductive machine in place of a human or you, and this in an iterated self-duplication. In that case the result amount to saying that no robot, when duplicated iteratively (in Washington and Moscow, say) can predict its future sequence of results of first person self-localization. This becomes equivalent with the fact that most finite bit-strings, like WMMMWWMWWWM ... are not compressible. Someone told me (out-of-line) that he *can* predict with certainty his future in that situation: for example he can predict W..., but this means he is not taking into account the saying of the other reconstituted people, which, *assuming comp* are genuine descendant of the original. Those people will acknowledge that their prediction with certainty was false, and they have the same right and reason to be taken seriously, again when we *assume* the comp hypothesis. Have you a problem with this? I think most on this list grasp this point, but don't hesitate to tell me if you don't. Without a clear understanding of what happens here we can't really proceed ... (nor can we grasp Everett formulation of QM I could argue ...). Bruno It is not clear to me how would you classically teleport my quantum computer. What are the read cut operations? This is a very different question. I just cannot classically teleport a quantum computer. And the UDA is supposed to already justify why we cannot teleport classicaly any piece of matter. The rough reason is that matter simply not exist, and what we called matter is just a rough description of what is observable and that emerges, a priori by comp, from infinities of infinite computations. But this is part of the conclusion of the UD Argument. Few people seems to realize that the violation of Bell's inequality or the non cloning theorem is an easy consequence of the comp hyp. I think people does not realize this because they are not used to take the difference between first and third person points of view seriously enough. This is perhaps a consequence of 1500 years of Aristotelian brainwashing I'm afraid. Or they are just confused by the fact that scientific argument cannot make reference to personal feelings or points of view, although of course scientific argument can *bear* upon such personal experiences, through definitions, axioms, discourses, etc. Yes, there exists a classical Turing machine which can simulate my quantum computer, Yes, but only by running those infinities of infinite (classical) computations (up to some hard to define equivalence relation: the lobian interview is all what I found to tackle this, and this is a lot because it has to eventually distinguish between loop gravity and superstring theory or whatever the correct third person description is correct). but I am not giving the running simulator to you. I don't have it. Ah but this is not true. Of course you can give me the running simulator ... in case you do accept Church Thesis. The running simulator *is* the UD, which exists by Church Thesis. The UD, globally does run all relative states from which, from your first person (plural) point of view, quantum computation emerges (if both comp and the quantum hyp are correct). It does it an infinity of times (in Arithmetical Platonia). Although an unknown quantum state is not clonable, it is preparable in infinities of examplars. We cannot recognize it in any third person way, yet, we cannot not recognize it, albeit implicitly, when we are living it. Of course this is step seven ... Please, make a short clarification about your framework. I might be just misinterpreting you. My hypothesis is that we are Turing-emulable, at some level of self-description. My conclusion is that whatever the Universe is, it cannot be Turing emulable, and in fine the physical laws emerges from machine theology (say). This makes the comp hyp testable: just derive some comp-physics, and compare it to empirical physics. What is the page reference to Gruska's book? In the footnote 9 of the SANE paper I am just alluding to the non-cloning theorem which, if I remùamber correctly, is well proved in two manners in the book of Gruska. Just look at Gruska's book index on non cloning. I don't have under my hands my exemplar right now. I hope this helps a bit.
Re: UDA paper
Hi Bruno,
yes, I am now a bit busy. Lecturing, seminars,.. wedding planning :-)
I am somewhere in the middle your paper. Regarding the very point of the
described 1-indeterminancy, I have no problem there at all. Anyone who
ever called a fork() unix function (read, cut, duplicate) followed by an
execve(read-destination-name-from-keyboard()) function, should not have
a problem here. A program, even with considerably good self-referential
skills, has no chance to know whether I will enter Warsaw or Moscow on
the keyboard.
As I have said, I have not finished reading the paper yet. But sometime
I have a problem with a bit of feeling of circularity of arguments, or
described in better words, given assumptions A={..}, conjectures B={...}
are true, where Bs feels like rephrased As, and therefore Bs are
trivially true. No disrespect here!
It just how do I feel now. Bs are overwhelming, but As are pretty strong
assumptions, so Bs are not surprising anymore, yet an hour later Bs are
overwhelming again.
Best,
Mirek
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Mirek,
I guess you are busy.
I would just like to insist that when I say (14-febr.-08):
Please note that the 1-indeterminacy I am talking about in the third
step is really a pure classical indeterminacy. It arises from the fact
that my classical state is duplicable, and then I cannot predict which
*experience* I will *feel* after a self-duplication: mainly Washington
OR Moscow (or Sidney *or* Beijing), ...
This is really a key point, if not *the* key point. I think it is
almost trivial, but sometimes some people have a problem with this. In
that case it helps to imagine the same experiment done with some
inference inductive machine in place of a human or you, and this in
an iterated self-duplication. In that case the result amount to saying
that no robot, when duplicated iteratively (in Washington and Moscow,
say) can predict its future sequence of results of first person
self-localization. This becomes equivalent with the fact that most
finite bit-strings, like WMMMWWMWWWM ... are not compressible.
Someone told me (out-of-line) that he *can* predict with certainty his
future in that situation: for example he can predict W..., but
this means he is not taking into account the saying of the other
reconstituted people, which, *assuming comp* are genuine descendant
of the original. Those people will acknowledge that their prediction
with certainty was false, and they have the same right and reason to
be taken seriously, again when we *assume* the comp hypothesis.
Have you a problem with this? I think most on this list grasp this
point, but don't hesitate to tell me if you don't. Without a clear
understanding of what happens here we can't really proceed ... (nor can
we grasp Everett formulation of QM I could argue ...).
Bruno
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: UDA paper
Hi Mirek, Le 12-févr.-08, à 23:20, Mirek Dobsicek a écrit : Hi Bruno, The UDA, in english, can be found here: */The Origin of Physical Laws and Sensations/*, (Invited Talk SANE 2004). Click on that title, or copy the following in your browser: http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/ SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html (if you study it I would suggest you print the slider too, so that you could perhaps tell me which step you would find hard to go through ). I have started reading this paper. Just a quick question. At the first step of UDA it seems you restrict yourself to classical bits. That is fine. I can imagine that somebody deliberately read and cut my running computer so that the computer goes on with its job after being 'reincarnated' in Helsinky. Even the substitution level is more or less clear. Noise on transistors is definitely not important. OK. However, at the third step you mention quantum mechanics. This is weird. I read it twice and don't see where I would mention quantum mechanics ? Please note that the 1-indeterminacy I am talking about in the third step is really a pure classical indeterminacy. It arises from the fact that my classical state is duplicable, and then I cannot predict which *experience* I will *feel* after a self-duplication: mainly Washington OR Moscow (or Sidney *or* Beijing), ... It is not clear to me how would you classically teleport my quantum computer. What are the read cut operations? This is a very different question. I just cannot classically teleport a quantum computer. And the UDA is supposed to already justify why we cannot teleport classicaly any piece of matter. The rough reason is that matter simply not exist, and what we called matter is just a rough description of what is observable and that emerges, a priori by comp, from infinities of infinite computations. But this is part of the conclusion of the UD Argument. Few people seems to realize that the violation of Bell's inequality or the non cloning theorem is an easy consequence of the comp hyp. I think people does not realize this because they are not used to take the difference between first and third person points of view seriously enough. This is perhaps a consequence of 1500 years of Aristotelian brainwashing I'm afraid. Or they are just confused by the fact that scientific argument cannot make reference to personal feelings or points of view, although of course scientific argument can *bear* upon such personal experiences, through definitions, axioms, discourses, etc. Yes, there exists a classical Turing machine which can simulate my quantum computer, Yes, but only by running those infinities of infinite (classical) computations (up to some hard to define equivalence relation: the lobian interview is all what I found to tackle this, and this is a lot because it has to eventually distinguish between loop gravity and superstring theory or whatever the correct third person description is correct). but I am not giving the running simulator to you. I don't have it. Ah but this is not true. Of course you can give me the running simulator ... in case you do accept Church Thesis. The running simulator *is* the UD, which exists by Church Thesis. The UD, globally does run all relative states from which, from your first person (plural) point of view, quantum computation emerges (if both comp and the quantum hyp are correct). It does it an infinity of times (in Arithmetical Platonia). Although an unknown quantum state is not clonable, it is preparable in infinities of examplars. We cannot recognize it in any third person way, yet, we cannot not recognize it, albeit implicitly, when we are living it. Of course this is step seven ... Please, make a short clarification about your framework. I might be just misinterpreting you. My hypothesis is that we are Turing-emulable, at some level of self-description. My conclusion is that whatever the Universe is, it cannot be Turing emulable, and in fine the physical laws emerges from machine theology (say). This makes the comp hyp testable: just derive some comp-physics, and compare it to empirical physics. What is the page reference to Gruska's book? In the footnote 9 of the SANE paper I am just alluding to the non-cloning theorem which, if I remùamber correctly, is well proved in two manners in the book of Gruska. Just look at Gruska's book index on non cloning. I don't have under my hands my exemplar right now. I hope this helps a bit. The key point: I am not mentioning or using QM at all in the UDA, except for illustrating how the comp-physics, with its many histories (computation from first person perspectives) and non cloning phenomena is already similar to the empirical physics. I hope this helps, Best, Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
