RE: Which is Fundamental?

From: Lee Corbin <lcorbin.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 20:53:53 -0700

Stathis writes

> [Lee wrote]
> > About observer-moments, I would say what LaPlace answered to
> > Napoleon about a deity: "I have no need of that hypothesis".
>
> [Bruno responded]
> > But you cannot say they does not exist. You would be lying to yourself. You
> > are living just one of them right now.
> > Of course when I say I don't need the hypothesis of "the laws of physics" I
> > am anticipating the successful derivation of QM from arithmetical observer
> > moment. It seems to me I got enough to at least be doubting we need in
> > principle the laws of physics, and the comp-physics I did derived from the
> > computationalist hypothesis, although it cannot yet be considered as a real
> > competitor of QM right now, it is in advance, right now, by putting light
> > on the three questions above, as I will try to make clear without technics
> > asap (on both list).

Yes, I apologized in an earlier email for appearing to claim
that I believed observer-moments not to exist. After all,
LaPlace was somewhat strongly implying that he didn't believe
in God, or at least it would be reasonable to wonder about his
belief.

Bruno, I certainly wish you the absolute best of luck in
deriving a law of physics from comp! Getting a version
of string theory that afforded predictions would be as
nothing in comparison from starting from incompleteness
(in math) and deriving physics and observers.

Stathis makes a generous offer:

> I agree with Bruno about observer-moments. Lee, I'll PayPal
> you $50 if you can convince me that you can doubt that you
> are experiencing an observer-moment!

You don't know how tempting it is for me to try! Once, many
years ago having become exasperated with two friends one night
who were questioning whether consciousness is indeed necessary
for sentient creatures, I slowly allowed an expression of
extreme shock and incredulity to come over my features. Then I
blurted out to them that indeed it was becoming perfectly clear
to me that I WAS NOT CONSCIOUS, that I simply couldn't relate
to their narratives of all this "internal" stuff. I think that
I half-fooled them, at least for a little while!

No. You and Bruno are perfectly right. I'd be lying if I claimed
not to have any consciousness or observer-moments. But thanks
for the offer anyway!

Lee
Received on Wed May 11 2005 - 23:59:30 PDT