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

From: Brian Tenneson <tennesb.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 08:55:32 -0700

Oops.

to finish...

For all devices x,

if x is complex is some sense then x is conscious in some (possibly other)

sense.

In other words, for all devices x, (a) -logically entails- (b):

(a) there is a partition D_t of t such that T(x; R, D_t) = 1

(b) there is a partition (D_t)' of t such that T(x; C, (D_t)') = 1.

Basically, when I continue my so called algebraic physics paper, I will

probably see how far I can get by not defining C. I do at least have a

notion for R: it will be a standardized measure of pseudo-randomness or

complexity that at least fairly measures all devices and has no bias....

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Brian Tenneson <tennesb.domain.name.hidden> wrote:

What I mean here can be stated now:

Let R be a device measure pertaining to complexity, such as akin Kolomogorov

complexity and C be a to-be-determined device measure about consciousness.

For all devices x,

if T(x; R, D_t) = 1, for some D_t, THEN

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

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 May 14 2008 - 11:55:40 PDT

Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 08:55:32 -0700

Oops.

to finish...

For all devices x,

if x is complex is some sense then x is conscious in some (possibly other)

sense.

In other words, for all devices x, (a) -logically entails- (b):

(a) there is a partition D_t of t such that T(x; R, D_t) = 1

(b) there is a partition (D_t)' of t such that T(x; C, (D_t)') = 1.

Basically, when I continue my so called algebraic physics paper, I will

probably see how far I can get by not defining C. I do at least have a

notion for R: it will be a standardized measure of pseudo-randomness or

complexity that at least fairly measures all devices and has no bias....

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Brian Tenneson <tennesb.domain.name.hidden> wrote:

What I mean here can be stated now:

Let R be a device measure pertaining to complexity, such as akin Kolomogorov

complexity and C be a to-be-determined device measure about consciousness.

For all devices x,

if T(x; R, D_t) = 1, for some D_t, THEN

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

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 May 14 2008 - 11:55:40 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:14 PST
*