X-Message-Number: 12983
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 21:57:32 -0700
From: Mike Perry <>
Subject: Consciousness and Machine Simulation

Some quotes and comments regarding Bob Ettinger's posting, #12980:

>Second, a digital computer could not (with full accuracy) simulate a 
>continuous universe; and we have no assurance that our universe is discrete 
>at the level of a digital computer. 
>

But a "universal quantum simulator" has been shown possible (assuming the
validity of quantum mechanics, of course) and this I think can be turned
into a powerful argument favoring the ability of a "digital computer"
(suitably understood as a quantum device) to simulate happenings in a finite
universe, however large. I don't think the machine would have to be as large
as or larger than what it is simulating if you allow for development over time.

>Third, the word "simulation" fudges the time element. If a linear computer 
>"simulates" a dynamic system, then one could equally well say that the mere 
>program and initial data store themselves simulate the system, without the 
>computer running.
>

This I disagree with, since the linear computer IS running, which is a
different thing from not running, i.e. doing nothing.

>Fourth (and this is partially redundant), a mere description is not an 
>emulation. I could (in principle, assuming that present quantum mechanics is 
>the be-all and end-all, and assuming enough information and enough time) 
>write out in long hand a description of the present and future states of any 
>system, e.g. you and your environment. To imagine that such a description 
>would BE you and your future life seems like nonsense, apologies to Moravec.
>

It does seem highly questionable, if not downright silly, to argue that a
static description of "you and your future life" IS in some strong sense the
selfsame you and your future, with expression of consciousness and feeling.
However, such a description, if it exists, must come into being somehow,
i.e. by some kind of active process. The active process in turn, has a
better claim to be something that genuinely exhibits consciousness and
feeling. The static record at least seems in some essential way connected to
real consciousness, even if not expressing it directly. One version of this
should not seem at all outlandish: the frozen cryonics patient whose static
"record" (memories in the brain, etc. which we hope are well-preserved) will
not be conscious but are certainly connected with real states of that
person's consciousness.

Mike Perry

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12983