Re: Machines was:Kim 2.1

From: Kim Jones <kimjones.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 08:49:01 +1100

On 27/12/2008, at 7:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

> nd sometimes, even that is not enough, and you have to climb on the
> higher infinities. I think Kim was asking for an example of well-
> defined notions which are not effective. The existence of such non
> effective objects is not obvious at all for non mathematicians.
>
> Your interpretation was correct too given that Kim question was
> ambiguous.


I wanted to know if you can have:

1. A system with a defined set of rules but no definite description
(an electron?)

or

2. A system with a definite description but no rules governing it (???)


Based on Abram's original distinction, as a way of separating the two
types of machine that Günther specified.

My intuition says you can have 1 but maybe not 2. I am struggling here
maybe badly...

Most systems of course have both. Arithmetical reality surely has
rules but I'm wondering about the description?

Maybe it is the candidate as Bruno suggests?


cheers,


K
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Fri Dec 26 2008 - 16:49:25 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:15 PST