Re: Dreaming On

From: Bruno Marchal <>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:55:57 +0200

On 31 Jul 2009, at 18:05, 1Z wrote:
> If it isn;t RITSIAR, it cannot be generating me. Mathematical
> proofs only prove mathematical "existence", not onltolgical
> existence. For a non-Platonist , 23 "exists" mathematically,
> but is not RITSIAR. The same goes for the UD

Is an atom RITSIAR? Is a quark RITISIAR?

The point is just that IF you survive "in the RITSIAR" sense, with a
digital (even material, if you want) brain, then materiality has to be
retrieved by coherence or gluing property of immaterial computation,
or there is an error in the UD Argument.

>>> wihout a UDA there are no generated minds, without generated minds
>>> there is no illusory matter.
>> Sure. But the UD exists, like prime number exists.
> Which for a non-Platononists is not at all
> in the relevant sense.

Again, if that is true, there must be something wrong in the UD
Argument. Which one?

> How can a conlusion that the material world doesn't exist
> be neutrral about Platonism?

The point is that Platonism is in the conclusion, not in the hypothesis.

> If Platonism is false,
> the mathematical world doesn';t exist either. and
> there is nowhere for the UD to exist at all.

Why do you want the UD to exist somewhere? Does prime numbers need to
exist somewhere to exist at all?
Does the physical universe exist somewhere?

The UDA reasoning is, in a short way: Comp -> Platonism. (In your
sense of platonism).
If you believe Platonism is false, then by the UD Argument, you
believe that comp (i.e. YD + CT) is false, or you believe that there
is something wrong in UDA.


Let me ask you that question precisely.

Is it a problem with the first person indeterminacy and its invariance
properties? That is, is it a problem in the first sixth steps: UDA 1--6.
Is it a problem with UDA-7. Where the indeterminacy domain, still
material, is infinite?
Is it a problem with UDA-8. Where the indeterminacy field become
(sigma_1) arithmetical?

(sigma_1 means here a very tiny part of arithmetical truth, actually a
verifiable part which is common to intuitionist and platonist (in the
weak sense of believer in classical logic, sigma_1 = machine turing
accessible, in some sense.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Fri Jul 31 2009 - 19:55:57 PDT

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