Re: Interested in thoughts on this excerpt from Martin Rees

From: Bruno Marchal <>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 14:07:37 +0200

Le 04-août-06, à 15:18, W. C. a écrit :

> I remember other people mentioned before. *Normal* people can't accept
> that
> there is no physical universe.
> Even Buddhists won't say that.

Sorry. I was short. All what I say is that IF we take the comp hyp
seriously enough THEN we can see that "physical" is not a primitive
things (this follows from the UD reasoning, you can ask question). I
was meaning there is no "primitive" or "substantial" or "primary"
physicalness. Naïve primitive Matter is a form of "ether" (assuming
comp). On the contrary "physics", as the science of observable patterns
reemerge as a study of relative measure on computations (more exactly
quotient of set of computations by a relation of undistinguishability
related to person's point of view). Those are well defined through the
Church thesis in computer science. Now the objective idealist (not
solipsist) type of reality we are lead to from the comp assumption has
been defended by many buddhist schools (mainly from the Mahayana), and
has been more or less the orthodox way to consider reality during a
millennium of greek philosophy/theology. You are right it hurts common

The rest of your post has been well answered by Stathis and Quentin,
imo. I have nothing to add.
Recall that nobody asks you to believe that comp is correct, just to
assume it for the sake of the argument.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Sat Aug 05 2006 - 08:09:45 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST