30 years ago after reading Hofstadter's GEB, I used to surmise that more parallel tech would provide a breakthrough in dealing with Gödelian issues in Turing machine serial tech, then I thought more analog than digital systems might be better (like memristor tech), but in recent months I've realised both analog and digital are ratios, and I how does any hindsight machine 'compute' --- "I am the stag."

While the pivot here is linguistic identity by way of 'to be ' as a copula, which can be mapped to doing (1) logical identity, is this isomorphic with, or merely as useful as metaphorically saying (2) the metaphor "I am the stag". (not a logical identity). (In a Turing serial machine universe how is this falsehood even possible, let alone calculable?)

Gödel was an intuitive Platonist, his work was against the Formalists of his day. Personally I don't see any difference between Gödel & formalism, i mean, is the universe a calculator, or a bad calculator?

"Was Gödel a Gödelian Platonist?" looks particularly interesting.

What if the universe only counts and never calculates, does the halting problem apply? so much to worry about, inflation, expansion,---- see Barbour's Janus Point

Other: All 4 are possible (and more), and everyone potentially does each of those to different degrees. Consciousness is then, in large part, an awareness of the discrepancies between these cognitive perspectives and other cognitive processes, in yourself and others.

all are very recent variations of turing machines in framework, for a different "oracle" "godelian" machine framework see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275024071_The_Relativistic_Brain_How_it_works_and_why_it_is_not_stimulable_by_a_Turing_Machine

(I don't prefer any model. i just do it)

Interesting, I just finished Penrose's Shadows of the Mind where he argues the same. Glad to see the topic still gets attention

edited May 830 years ago after reading Hofstadter's GEB, I used to surmise that more parallel tech would provide a breakthrough in dealing with Gödelian issues in Turing machine serial tech, then I thought more analog than digital systems might be better (like memristor tech), but in recent months I've realised both analog and digital are ratios, and I how does any hindsight machine 'compute' --- "I am the stag."

While the pivot here is linguistic identity by way of 'to be ' as a copula, which can be mapped to doing (1) logical identity, is this isomorphic with, or merely as useful as metaphorically saying (2) the metaphor "I am the stag". (not a logical identity). (In a Turing serial machine universe how is this falsehood even possible, let alone calculable?)

See also https://whyweshould.substack.com/p/metaphor-me-a-ratio-just-like-you

where i am beginning to work through these notices/questions

[[substack work will be eventually migrated to

https://whyweshould.loofs-samorzewski.com/ ]]

Gödel was an intuitive Platonist, his work was against the Formalists of his day. Personally I don't see any difference between Gödel & formalism, i mean, is the universe a calculator, or a bad calculator?

https://www.edge.org/conversation/rebecca_newberger_goldstein-godel-and-the-nature-of-mathematical-truth

a google search is currently useful on this topic: https://tinyurl.com/godelsearch

"Was Gödel a Gödelian Platonist?" looks particularly interesting.

What if the universe only counts and never calculates, does the halting problem apply? so much to worry about, inflation, expansion,---- see Barbour's Janus Point

https://whyweshould.loofs-samorzewski.com/reaction-review-of-the-janus-point.html

Other: All 4 are possible (and more), and everyone potentially does each of those to different degrees. Consciousness is then, in large part, an awareness of the discrepancies between these cognitive perspectives and other cognitive processes, in yourself and others.

Bonferroni corrections? (/pedantic)

Thanks!

My “other” vote is for “whatever it is, it isn’t IIT”.

The IIT atheist has logged on