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

From: <GSLevy.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 17:47:58 EDT

In a message dated 99-08-19 18:46:00 EDT, Jacques Mallah writes:

<< Since the number of implementations is infinite and they are

parameterized by continuous parameters, only infinite groups of them have

any significance. This is analagous to coloring a surface. It does not

matter if one point on a surface is colored, what matters is the *area*

that is colored. Measure is analagous to such an area. It is

quantifiable because just as two people have twice as much consciousness

as one person, doubling the number of implementations would double the

measure.

* >>
*

Jacques, I have a lot of trouble understanding what your conception of

measure is. Can it be expressed in some kind of units such as bits for

example? If it it can be expressed in bits, how can making two copies of an

identical document increase the amount of information (i.e., measure) ?

Or is measure just the number of copies of the document without regard to the

information? Then, what possible significance (your word) would there be in

differentiating between the original and the copy?

If measure is conserved, does making a copy spreads the measure between the

original and the copy, and thus the original ends up with less measure?

If measure is not conserved, does making a copy generates more measure?

You use the word "significance." Why? Is it the same as saying that measure

has "value?" Is an original more "valuable" or have more measure than the

copy? Furthermore, why would deleting either the original or the copy be a

loss in measure?

Could you please assign some units to quantify measure so that we can assess

its conservation (and other) properties. I believe that this is the first

step that must be taken to have a meaningful discussion.

George

Received on Sat Aug 21 1999 - 15:04:08 PDT

Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 17:47:58 EDT

In a message dated 99-08-19 18:46:00 EDT, Jacques Mallah writes:

<< Since the number of implementations is infinite and they are

parameterized by continuous parameters, only infinite groups of them have

any significance. This is analagous to coloring a surface. It does not

matter if one point on a surface is colored, what matters is the *area*

that is colored. Measure is analagous to such an area. It is

quantifiable because just as two people have twice as much consciousness

as one person, doubling the number of implementations would double the

measure.

Jacques, I have a lot of trouble understanding what your conception of

measure is. Can it be expressed in some kind of units such as bits for

example? If it it can be expressed in bits, how can making two copies of an

identical document increase the amount of information (i.e., measure) ?

Or is measure just the number of copies of the document without regard to the

information? Then, what possible significance (your word) would there be in

differentiating between the original and the copy?

If measure is conserved, does making a copy spreads the measure between the

original and the copy, and thus the original ends up with less measure?

If measure is not conserved, does making a copy generates more measure?

You use the word "significance." Why? Is it the same as saying that measure

has "value?" Is an original more "valuable" or have more measure than the

copy? Furthermore, why would deleting either the original or the copy be a

loss in measure?

Could you please assign some units to quantify measure so that we can assess

its conservation (and other) properties. I believe that this is the first

step that must be taken to have a meaningful discussion.

George

Received on Sat Aug 21 1999 - 15:04:08 PDT

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