Re: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
On 03 Jan 2013, at 18:13, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all that this kind of explanation does is shift the mystery of consciousness from a person to a space. It ascribes the power of feeling and thinking to an arithmetic idea rather than a person, leaving us right back where we started - asking why does an arithmetic idea have thoughts and feelings. Because we assume the brain works like a computer. Then, no computer can distinguish an arithmetical reality supportinh his personhood from any other reality supporting Turing universality, unless it belongs to a simulation in some normal world(s) supplied by infinitely many corrections (that is we are purposefully failed by liars). Bruno -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Eq5Ru03zbcEJ . 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 03 Jan 2013, at 18:13, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all that this kind of explanation does is shift the mystery of consciousness from a person to a space. It ascribes the power of feeling and thinking to an arithmetic idea rather than a person, leaving us right back where we started - asking why does an arithmetic idea have thoughts and feelings. Because we assume the brain works like a computer. Then, no computer can distinguish an arithmetical reality supportinh his personhood from any other reality supporting Turing universality, unless it belongs to a simulation in some normal world(s) supplied by infinitely many corrections (that is we are purposefully failed by liars). Bruno Many investigators of consciousness hypothesize that consciousness is not computable and may be the result of Godelian incompleteness. I had thought that you Bruno were of the same mind. Is that so? The above paragraph makes me wonder Richard -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Eq5Ru03zbcEJ. 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. -- 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 7:10:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 03 Jan 2013, at 18:13, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all that this kind of explanation does is shift the mystery of consciousness from a person to a space. It ascribes the power of feeling and thinking to an arithmetic idea rather than a person, leaving us right back where we started - asking why does an arithmetic idea have thoughts and feelings. Because we assume the brain works like a computer. Then, no computer can distinguish an arithmetical reality supportinh his personhood from any other reality supporting Turing universality, unless it belongs to a simulation in some normal world(s) supplied by infinitely many corrections (that is we are purposefully failed by liars). So instead of assuming that we are conscious, you assume that the brain is a computer and computation is conscious. Why is that an improvement? Craig Bruno -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Eq5Ru03zbcEJ. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/5y_-Kzk1gloJ. 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
On 1/5/2013 10:38 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Saturday, January 5, 2013 7:10:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 03 Jan 2013, at 18:13, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all that this kind of explanation does is shift the mystery of consciousness from a person to a space. It ascribes the power of feeling and thinking to an arithmetic idea rather than a person, leaving us right back where we started - asking why does an arithmetic idea have thoughts and feelings. Because we assume the brain works like a computer. Then, no computer can distinguish an arithmetical reality supportinh his personhood from any other reality supporting Turing universality, unless it belongs to a simulation in some normal world(s) supplied by infinitely many corrections (that is we are purposefully failed by liars). So instead of assuming that we are conscious, you assume that the brain is a computer and computation is conscious. Why is that an improvement? Because computation is well defined and it implicitly creates modal categories that might model the different categories or degrees of awarness and self-awarness. So it may make testable predictions. Brent -- 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism---habit computer
Hi Craig Weinberg Richard rejects the concept of inextended space. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/4/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Craig Weinberg Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-03, 12:13:16 Subject: Re: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism---habit computer On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all that this kind of explanation does is shift the mystery of consciousness from a person to a space. It ascribes the power of feeling and thinking to an arithmetic idea rather than a person, leaving us right back where we started - asking why does an arithmetic idea have thoughts and feelings. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Eq5Ru03zbcEJ. 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
Hi Roger Clough, Nova Spivack has two linked blogs following the one I copied below in which he argues that since consciousness is not computable, something he takes for granted, then consciousness must be even more fundamental than spacetime. You might find it of interest to read all three linked articles as to me it sounded a bit like what you and even Sheldrake have been saying. In the end Nova recommends mindless meditation to experience pure consciousness. BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist My understanding of Sheldrake's results suggests to me that the universe is not like a deterministic great computer, or if it is, the deterministic or mechanical part acts like a filter to incline random motions to more regular ones which Sheldrake calls habits or morphic resonances. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/3/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-02, 19:25:06 Subject: Re: Conputer Code In String Theory Supersimetric Equations Here is a lay description: http://www.novaspivack.com/uncategorized/is-the-universe-a-computer-new-evidence-emerges Is the Universe a Computer? New Evidence Emerges. March 22nd, 2012 Share on twitterShare on google_plusoneShare on tumblrShare on emailMore Sharing Services I haven? posted in a while, but this is blog-worthy material. I?e recently become familiar with the thinking of University of Maryland physicist, James Gates Jr. Dr. Gates is working on a branch of physics called supersymmetry. In the process of his work he? discovered the presence of what appear to resemble a form of computer code, called error correcting codes, embedded within, or resulting from, the equations of supersymmetry that describe fundamental particles. You can read a non-technical description of what Dr. Gates has discovered in this article, which I highly recommend. In the article, Gates asks, ?ow could we discover whether we live inside a Matrix? One answer might be ?ry to detect the presence of codes in the laws that describe physics.? And this is precisely what he has done. Specifically, within the equations of supersymmetry he has found, quite unexpectedly, what are called ?oubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block codes.? That? a long-winded label for codes that are commonly used to remove errors in computer transmissions, for example to correct errors in a sequence of bits representing text that has been sent across a wire. Gates explains, ?his unsuspected connection suggests that these codes may be ubiquitous in nature, and could even be embedded in the essence of reality. If this is the case, we might have something in common with the Matrix science-fiction films, which depict a world where everything human being? experience is the product of a virtual-reality-generating computer network.? Why are these codes hidden in the laws of fundamental particles? ?ould it be that codes, in some deep and fundamental way, control the structure of our reality?,? he asks. It? a good question. If you want to explore further, here is a Youtube video by someone who is interested in popularizing Dr. Gates? work, containing an audio interview that is worth hearing. Here, you can hear Gates describe the potential significance of his discovery in layman? terms. The video then goes on to explain how all of this might be further evidence for Bostrom? Simulation Hypothesis (in which it is suggested that the universe is a computer simulation). (NOTE: The video is a bit annoying ? in particular the melodramatic soundtrack, but it? still worth watching in order to get a quick high level overview of what this is all about, and some of the wild implications). Now why does this discovery matter? Well it is more than strange and intriguing that fundamental physics equations that describe the universe would contain these error correcting codes. Could it mean that the universe itself is built with error correcting codes in it, codes that that are just like those used in computers and computer networks? Did they emerge naturally, or are they artifacts of some kind of intelligent design? Or do they indicate the universe literally IS a computer? For example maybe the universe is a cellular automata machine, or perhaps a loop quantum gravity computer. Digital Physics ? A New Kind of Science The view that the universe is some kind of computer is called digital physics ? it? a relatively new niche field within physics that may be destined for major importance in the future. But these are still early days. I?e been fascinated by the possibility that the universe is a computer since
Re: Re: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism---habit computer
Hi Richard Ruquist Sheldrake and leibniz would offer a more shocking picture, namely that strings, like all matter, are alive. But Gates is to be congratulated for excaping from the cult of materialism. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/3/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-03, 10:45:01 Subject: Re: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism---habit computer Hi Roger Clough, Nova Spivack has two linked blogs following the one I copied below in which he argues that since consciousness is not computable, something he takes for granted, then consciousness must be even more fundamental than spacetime. You might find it of interest to read all three linked articles as to me it sounded a bit like what you and even Sheldrake have been saying. In the end Nova recommends mindless meditation to experience pure consciousness. BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist My understanding of Sheldrake's results suggests to me that the universe is not like a deterministic great computer, or if it is, the deterministic or mechanical part acts like a filter to incline random motions to more regular ones which Sheldrake calls habits or morphic resonances. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/3/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-02, 19:25:06 Subject: Re: Conputer Code In String Theory Supersimetric Equations Here is a lay description: http://www.novaspivack.com/uncategorized/is-the-universe-a-computer-new-evidence-emerges Is the Universe a Computer? New Evidence Emerges. March 22nd, 2012 Share on twitterShare on google_plusoneShare on tumblrShare on emailMore Sharing Services I haven? posted in a while, but this is blog-worthy material. I?e recently become familiar with the thinking of University of Maryland physicist, James Gates Jr. Dr. Gates is working on a branch of physics called supersymmetry. In the process of his work he? discovered the presence of what appear to resemble a form of computer code, called error correcting codes, embedded within, or resulting from, the equations of supersymmetry that describe fundamental particles. You can read a non-technical description of what Dr. Gates has discovered in this article, which I highly recommend. In the article, Gates asks, ?ow could we discover whether we live inside a Matrix? One answer might be ?ry to detect the presence of codes in the laws that describe physics.? And this is precisely what he has done. Specifically, within the equations of supersymmetry he has found, quite unexpectedly, what are called ?oubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block codes.? That? a long-winded label for codes that are commonly used to remove errors in computer transmissions, for example to correct errors in a sequence of bits representing text that has been sent across a wire. Gates explains, ?his unsuspected connection suggests that these codes may be ubiquitous in nature, and could even be embedded in the essence of reality. If this is the case, we might have something in common with the Matrix science-fiction films, which depict a world where everything human being? experience is the product of a virtual-reality-generating computer network.? Why are these codes hidden in the laws of fundamental particles? ?ould it be that codes, in some deep and fundamental way, control the structure of our reality?,? he asks. It? a good question. If you want to explore further, here is a Youtube video by someone who is interested in popularizing Dr. Gates? work, containing an audio interview that is worth hearing. Here, you can hear Gates describe the potential significance of his discovery in layman? terms. The video then goes on to explain how all of this might be further evidence for Bostrom? Simulation Hypothesis (in which it is suggested that the universe is a computer simulation). (NOTE: The video is a bit annoying ? in particular the melodramatic soundtrack, but it? still worth watching in order to get a quick high level overview of what this is all about, and some of the wild implications). Now why does this discovery matter? Well it is more than strange and intriguing that fundamental physics equations that describe the universe would contain these error correcting codes. Could it mean that the universe itself is built with error correcting codes in it, codes that that are just like those used in computers and computer networks? Did they emerge naturally, or are they artifacts of some kind
Re: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: BTW my stichk is that consciousness comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the megaverse and in each universe. Richard Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all that this kind of explanation does is shift the mystery of consciousness from a person to a space. It ascribes the power of feeling and thinking to an arithmetic idea rather than a person, leaving us right back where we started - asking why does an arithmetic idea have thoughts and feelings. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Eq5Ru03zbcEJ. 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism--- habit computer
On 1/3/2013 10:22 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist My understanding of Sheldrake's results suggests to me that the universe is not like a deterministic great computer, or if it is, the deterministic or mechanical part acts like a filter to incline random motions to more regular ones which Sheldrake calls habits or morphic resonances. Hi, Could it be that what Rupert is observing is the statistical effects (in large numbers) of what quantum entanglement implies? ISTM, that at the quantum level two wave functions that are the same are one and the same and so forth for similar WFs. I never saw Sheldrake's work as contradicting any real physical laws, just the prejudices of classically trained minds. -- Onward! Stephen -- 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: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism---habit computer
Hi Stephen P. King Entanglement is a major part of Sheldrake's ideas, which also allow for fields within fields, you might be happy to know. The fields can be mental and social fields, And includes resonance between fields such as telepathy.. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/4/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-03, 18:28:26 Subject: Re: a Sheldrake computer:: the universe as a random + mechanism---habit computer On 1/3/2013 10:22 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist My understanding of Sheldrake's results suggests to me that the universe is not like a deterministic great computer, or if it is, the deterministic or mechanical part acts like a filter to incline random motions to more regular ones which Sheldrake calls habits or morphic resonances. Hi, Could it be that what Rupert is observing is the statistical effects (in large numbers) of what quantum entanglement implies? ISTM, that at the quantum level two wave functions that are the same are one and the same and so forth for similar WFs. I never saw Sheldrake's work as contradicting any real physical laws, just the prejudices of classically trained minds. -- Onward! Stephen -- 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.
