On Thursday, June 11, 2020 at 5:15:30 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 11 Jun 2020, at 04:00, Alan Grayson <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 11:25:51 AM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> 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, >> > > I don’t know. If you are right on this, this entails that “G” is > geographical. Of course, this comes from the fact that mechanism has to > re-define the physical by the laws on the observable available to all > universal numbers. If not, some non Turing elulable magic is brought in the > theory of mind (implicitly). >
Firstly, I don't take any firm position on the ontological status of the physical universe. What I AM saying is that logic alone and the property of numbers do not have sufficient inherent information to distinguish the validity of physical theories, where validity means predictability. Good predictions are what we use to distinguish good theories, and this has nothing to do with the ontological status of the physical universe. As for "the observable available to all universal numbers", I also doubt that numbers can observe anything. AG > > > > 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 >> > > I got my answer, by default. AG > > > ? > > Bruno > > > > > > -- > 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] <javascript:>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4313005b-46dd-40dc-af15-743643cee643o%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4313005b-46dd-40dc-af15-743643cee643o%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/7398f81b-ad38-4bae-b08c-55486abc0712o%40googlegroups.com.
