I think I found a way to get computationalism fully to work, and its fundamental algebra is the boolean automaton, but I am worried that fully accepting the solution will turn me in into a boolean automaton. If I am wrong, I will lose consciousness, if I am right, I never had it.
-
-
Seems like you're converging towards this: "To view the Church-Turing hypothesis as a physical principle does not merely make computer science a branch of physics. It also makes part of experimental physics into a branch of computer science." https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~christos/classics/Deutsch_quantum_theory.pdf …
-
I have been there for quite some time. The question is if there could possibly be a way out of it.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Dr. Who tried to do the same with the Weeping Angels, but the only sure advice is still “don't blink.” There's no way around – only through.
-
Seems watertight. Might not even be a possibility left to construct alternatives, especially if I get physics to work. And nobody ever gets through. Chomsky and Penrose want but are stuck. The true implementation mode might not even be suitable for constructive mental modeling.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.