X-Message-Number: 22297
From: 
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 09:25:20 EDT
Subject: where is the metasystem?

--part1_10f.24a48a14.2c5fb8c0_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mike Perry writes in part:

> Well, let's suppose we find that human brains produce a standing wave when 
> and only when the subject is conscious. So we make a device that only 
> simulates this standing wave; it is not the real thing. But the simulation 
> results, as expected, in behavior that appears in all outward respects to 
> involve consciousness. Perhaps a robot with this device as its brain will 
> shout, "hey, I'm conscious!" and generally behave exactly as you'd expect 
> if it really was conscious. So how do you know it is *not* conscious?

He also talks about simulation at the level of "elementary" particles such as 
electrons and neutrons.

There are several possibilities for making objective observations of 

subjective conditions (or the lack of them), but for the moment I'll just insert
this 
reminder:

No simulation of the near future is possible, and no simulation of the 
intermediate future is likely, that will fully and accurately represent a real 
system, for the simple reason that we KNOW the current theories of physics are 

incomplete and have uncertain domains of even approximate applicability. 
Electrons 
and neutrons don't cut it. You may need strings or branes and 10 or 12 
dimensions including extra dimensions of time, blah blah blah. 

And yet again the reminder that a computer is the realization of a formal 
system, with syntax but no semantics. No formal system stands on its own; it 
needs the context of a metasystem. Where is the metasystem for the simulation?

Robert Ettinger

--part1_10f.24a48a14.2c5fb8c0_boundary

 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22297