- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Jacques Bailhache <Jacques.Bailhache.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:26:15 -0000

Hi Bruno,

You said :

* >machines are able to know much more than they are able to proof or
*

* >communicate.
*

I know that any machine or formal system has a Godel proposition which

express it own non-provability, and therefore is true but not provable if

the system is consistant. But shouldn't we consider that the machine really

know something with certainty only if it can prove it ?

* >Indeed my work show (or at least intend to show)
*

* >that once we take seriously mechanist hypothesis then we have no
*

other

* >choice than to derive the physical laws from a kind of abstract
*

* >psychology which is itself derivable from computer science or
*

number

* >theory.
*

It seems clear to me that the physical laws are mathematical.

But do you want to derive only the physical laws of OUR universe ?

It seems to me that each mathematical theory could generate a physical

universe since this theory generates spirit which perceive this theory as

its universe, which means according to my idea that this theory is in fact

defined by an infinite sequence of theories which is not finitely

descriptible.

See http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/hum.htm

Metaphysical reflections

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/reflres.htm> - Hypothesis

of mathematical universes

At the beginning was nothing. But this nothing has a structure which is

studied by mathematics. Mathematical truths are universal. They are true in

our universe, but also in any universe, and would remain true even if there

were no universe.

This structure contains infinite <naturesp.htm> mathematical models

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/enhttp://www.website2u.com/log/te

xt/reflmph/english/glish/regul.htm> that we can define as limits of infinite

converging sequences of finite models which realize successive

approximations more and more precize, in the same way we can define real

numbers as limits of converging sequences of rational numbers.

We can virtually consider that any mathematical model generates a universe,

but this universe really exists only if it contains spirit that perceives it

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/exesprit.htm>. According

to the fundamental metaphysical principle, every infinite mathematical model

generates spirit perceiving this model as an external reality constituting

the physical universe in which this spirit lives

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/naturesp.htm>.

This idea has been feeled by the polish science-fiction novelist Stanislas

Lem in the short novel titled "Profsor A. Donda" ("The professor A. Donda").

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/donda.htm>

The existence of an infinity of mathematical models yields to the existence

of an infinity of universes

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/hmm.htm>. Each of these

universes, including of course our universe, would then be the

materialization of a mathematical model, or rather what we perceive as a

materialization, because in fact everything would be only relationship

between mathematical beings.

We will now examine the consequences of this hypothesis of mathematical

universes, trying to answer to some metaphysical interrogations at the light

of this hypothesis.

This hypothesis of mathematical universes gives a new lighting

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/rfu.htm> on the

non-determinism of quantum physics when the wave function collapses and

about the many worlds hypothesis.

After having written this text and having heared some comments about it, my

idea evolved concerning the concept of nothing : if nothing contains

everything, it is not really nothing. It could be seen as a proof by

absurdity that there cannot be nothing.

Jacques.

==========================

Jacques Bailhache

Y2K Centre of Expertise (BRO)

DTN: 856 ext. 7662

Tel: +32-2 729.7662, Fax: +32-2 729.7985

Email: mailto:Jacques.Bailhache.domain.name.hidden

Visit my home page :

http://www.website2u.com/log/index.htm

http://www.byoc.com/homepage/134885/

http://www.chez.com/log/

http://members.rotfl.com/log/

*> -----Original Message-----
*

*> From: Marchal [SMTP:marchal.domain.name.hidden]
*

*> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 1999 10:24 AM
*

*> To: Gilles HENRI
*

*> Cc: 'everything-list.domain.name.hidden'
*

*> Subject: RE: Amoeba croaks -
*

*>
*

*>
*

*> Hi Gilles
*

*>
*

*> > What do you think of the
*

*> >phenomenological relevance of mechanism? That is, leaving completely
*

*> aside
*

*> >the question of consciousness, do you think that known physical laws,
*

*> >applied to our collection of neural cells in interaction with the outer
*

*> >world, can reproduce our external behaviour, including language, artistic
*

*> >creations, etc?
*

*>
*

*>
*

*> I see things the other way round. I do believe in the relevance of
*

*> mechanism for both behaviour or even consciousness. For exemple
*

*> consciousness is linked to the facts that (self-referentially correct)
*

*> machines are able to know much more than they are able to proof or
*

*> communicate. This follow almost easily when (unlike Lucas or Penrose) we
*

*> agree that incompleteness phenomenon apply to us.
*

*> But, unlike most physicist, I do not take matter or physical laws (known
*

*> or unknown) for granted. Indeed my work show (or at least intend to show)
*

*> that once we take seriously mechanist hypothesis then we have no other
*

*> choice than to derive the physical laws from a kind of abstract
*

*> psychology which is itself derivable from computer science or number
*

*> theory.
*

*> To put it roughly : I think that the question of relevance of mechanism
*

*> is the question of explaining how (appearance of) matter and time
*

*> (including neural cells, brains, bodies) emerges on purely number
*

*> theoretical relations.
*

*>
*

*> Bye. Bruno
*

Received on Thu Jan 14 1999 - 08:17:06 PST

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:26:15 -0000

Hi Bruno,

You said :

I know that any machine or formal system has a Godel proposition which

express it own non-provability, and therefore is true but not provable if

the system is consistant. But shouldn't we consider that the machine really

know something with certainty only if it can prove it ?

other

number

It seems clear to me that the physical laws are mathematical.

But do you want to derive only the physical laws of OUR universe ?

It seems to me that each mathematical theory could generate a physical

universe since this theory generates spirit which perceive this theory as

its universe, which means according to my idea that this theory is in fact

defined by an infinite sequence of theories which is not finitely

descriptible.

See http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/hum.htm

Metaphysical reflections

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/reflres.htm> - Hypothesis

of mathematical universes

At the beginning was nothing. But this nothing has a structure which is

studied by mathematics. Mathematical truths are universal. They are true in

our universe, but also in any universe, and would remain true even if there

were no universe.

This structure contains infinite <naturesp.htm> mathematical models

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/enhttp://www.website2u.com/log/te

xt/reflmph/english/glish/regul.htm> that we can define as limits of infinite

converging sequences of finite models which realize successive

approximations more and more precize, in the same way we can define real

numbers as limits of converging sequences of rational numbers.

We can virtually consider that any mathematical model generates a universe,

but this universe really exists only if it contains spirit that perceives it

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/exesprit.htm>. According

to the fundamental metaphysical principle, every infinite mathematical model

generates spirit perceiving this model as an external reality constituting

the physical universe in which this spirit lives

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/naturesp.htm>.

This idea has been feeled by the polish science-fiction novelist Stanislas

Lem in the short novel titled "Profsor A. Donda" ("The professor A. Donda").

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/donda.htm>

The existence of an infinity of mathematical models yields to the existence

of an infinity of universes

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/hmm.htm>. Each of these

universes, including of course our universe, would then be the

materialization of a mathematical model, or rather what we perceive as a

materialization, because in fact everything would be only relationship

between mathematical beings.

We will now examine the consequences of this hypothesis of mathematical

universes, trying to answer to some metaphysical interrogations at the light

of this hypothesis.

This hypothesis of mathematical universes gives a new lighting

<http://www.website2u.com/log/text/reflmph/english/rfu.htm> on the

non-determinism of quantum physics when the wave function collapses and

about the many worlds hypothesis.

After having written this text and having heared some comments about it, my

idea evolved concerning the concept of nothing : if nothing contains

everything, it is not really nothing. It could be seen as a proof by

absurdity that there cannot be nothing.

Jacques.

==========================

Jacques Bailhache

Y2K Centre of Expertise (BRO)

DTN: 856 ext. 7662

Tel: +32-2 729.7662, Fax: +32-2 729.7985

Email: mailto:Jacques.Bailhache.domain.name.hidden

Visit my home page :

http://www.website2u.com/log/index.htm

http://www.byoc.com/homepage/134885/

http://www.chez.com/log/

http://members.rotfl.com/log/

Received on Thu Jan 14 1999 - 08:17:06 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST
*