On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 10:29:34 AM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 6:26:10 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 7 Jun 2020, at 17:56, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 9:00:46 AM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> It predicts everything, so it predicts nothing. AG >>> >> >> It's not unlike the monkey typing at random and coming up with >> Shakespeare's plays, or the Bible. AG >> >> >> Using this analogy, it is more like the monkey typing *all* books. Except >> that the monkey is elementary arithmetic, and there is non need of >> randomness at that stage, and also, the books are not books, but true >> (semantic) relations implementing computations, and then physics is shown >> to be an internal measure, isolated from the Göde-Löb-Solvay theorem in the >> mathematics iff self-reference. >> >> The theory is Kxy = x together with Sxyz = xz(yz), as I have explained a >> year ago. >> >> The theology is the modal logics G and G*, and the intensional (modal) >> variants imposed by incompleteness, and all that is justified without using >> more than the two axioms above. >> >> “My” theory is a sub theory of al scientific theories. >> >> Look at the conceptual progresses even just on physics: >> >> Bohr: >> - the wave equation (full arithmetic + analysis) >> - a dualist unintelligible theory of mind. >> >> Everett >> - the wave equation (full arithmetic + analysis) >> - Mechanism >> >> Your servitor: >> - arithmetic (a tiny part of arithmetic) >> - Mechanism. >> >> If “my" theory (which is actually a theorem showing that “my” theory is >> the Universal machine theory) predicts everything, then all theories >> predict everything. >> >> I suspect that you have not really try to understand the theory. It is >> not mine, it is the theory that any patient being can derive from mechanism >> and computer science/arithmetic. The hard work have already be done by >> Gödel, Kleene, Löb, and others. Two key theorems which summarise a lot are >> the two theorem by Solovay, which summarise the theology of the machine in >> one modal logic G*. Such question or read the papers if you want to really >> address the “mechanist mind-body problem”. >> >> Bruno >> > > I am not motivated to study your theory. If all computation are possible, > it seems to imply, for example, that any G describes a possible Newtonian > gravity law, but can't tell is which G corresponds to our universe, let > alone show that Newton's law is just a weak field approximation of GR. AG >
Also, I don't believe that logic alone, with the postulates of arithmetic, can distinguish one G from another, to obtain the weak field approximation of GR, aka Newtonian gravity; or that the measured velocity of light is independent of the motions of source and recipient. AG > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/42839686-3300-4fb6-bc61-987be7103c1ao%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/42839686-3300-4fb6-bc61-987be7103c1ao%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/5926c4b1-b2bf-4eaa-9b6d-1074b53534eeo%40googlegroups.com.
