On Wednesday 21 March 2007 17:46:32 Brent Meeker wrote:
> John M wrote:
> > Stathis and Brent:
> >
> > ineresting and hard-to-object sentiments.
> > Would it not make sense to write instead of
> > "we are" (thing-wise) -
> > the term less static, rather process-wise:
> > "We do" (in whatever action)?
> >
> > John M
>
> That's part of what I'm struggling with. ISTM that OMs, being static, may
> leave out something essential to consciousness. But this conflicts with
> the idea of simulations in which all process rates are encoded statically
> as state values. I think however this misses the point that a simulation
> must be *run* and that when it is run the computer provides the "rate",
> i.e. the clock.
>
> Brent Meeker
>
But the internal states of a computation are not tied to an "external" clock.
The "external" clock rate is irrelevant (from the inside).
Quentin Anciaux
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Mar 21 2007 - 16:21:46 PDT