2009/1/17 Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>:
> But I think you are assuming something about states that is false - i.e.
> that they are discrete non-overlapping things. According to our current
> understanding of physics this is not the case for brain states or
> computer states. Because they are distributed in space, relativity
> implies they are also distributed in time. Whether the causal
> connections can be sufficiently simulated in Bruno's UD is a separate
> question, but I don't think it's valid to argue that the spatiotemporal
> relations can be ignored in brains, which is what talk about "states"
> implies, therefore they can be ignored in representation consisting only
> of static states.
As Quentin pointed out, a computer state can be saved to disk and the
program continued at a later time or on another machine. This process
doesn't involve saving the actual instantaneous physical state of the
machine, but the point is that what is saved is the minimal
information for the program to continue. Are you suggesting that a
conscious program that goes through such a stop/save/restart process
would somehow be aware of this, even though the program post the
interruption appears to proceed the same way as it would have without
the interruption?
--
Stathis Papaioannou
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Jan 16 2009 - 21:30:12 PST