Re: Bruno's argument

From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 14:19:23 -0700

Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> Le Lundi 17 Juillet 2006 16:14, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :
>
>>You mean that since you can't know which computation generates your present
>>moment, you also can't point to which computer is generating that
>>computation.
>
>
> Worst than that, there is no computation that contains you, but an infinity of
> them... the problem is not to point, there is nothing to point.
>
>
>>That makes sense, assuming the UD is running and your
>>consciousness is a result of the UD. On the other hand, if your
>>consciousness is the result of physical processes in a single human brain,
>>you *can* point to the computer.
>
>
> When you mean computer, do you mean turing machine ?
> Do you mean consciousness is a program ? thus it could be duplicated and run
> at infinity (or a big number of times ;). Which part (instance) of this
> infinity/big running of the same program are you then ? Your current moment
> is not part of a single possible logical history... There are many past and
> many future from the present with this view and so many programs who go
> through your state.
> Another thing if consciousness is a program/computation :
> Imagine I run the program for 5 minutes, make a memory dump, continue the
> running from the dump on another machine for 5 minutes and so on... When I
> change machine it takes times... do you thing you're dead in between ? that
> you could be aware of any delays, of the number of instance running the same
> computation ? Then how could you say that these 5 minutes of your life was
> this computation on this machine, and not any machine which have come to go
> through exactly this state ?
>
> Regards,
> Quentin

Just to clarify - I take it that when discussing "you as a computation" that the computation must
include computation/simulation of the whole of the universe that you interact with during the time
period "computed". This computation must start with the boundary conditions defined over your past
light cone at the relevant interval. Right?

Brent Meeker

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Mon Jul 17 2006 - 17:20:34 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST