My next book, titled “Astounding universe, amazing grace,” will be a streamlined, simplified, and much shorter version of “Tales of the Turing Church.”
Thanks for sharing this. There is an implication of continuing dynamism as a primitive assumption for ‘existence.’ Does your intuition inspired by Gödel lead to The Mind at Large being ‘uncertain’ about dynamic experimental outcomes? Where does teleological rivalry come into play for the Mind at Large? What is OUR next experiment (does it merely emerge or does some create it?) and why does it ‘win’ over the others?
"There is an implication of continuing dynamism as a primitive assumption for ‘existence.’"
Yes, definitely. Existence is becoming.
"Does your intuition inspired by Gödel lead to The Mind at Large being ‘uncertain’ about dynamic experimental outcomes?"
I think so. It can be and it has been argued that WE are and can only be uncertain about the future, but Mind at Large (aka God) lives above time and sees all times at a glance. But then we must think of another time dimension (see last draft chapter about the cosmic operating system) in which Mind at Large thinks, because without change there's no thought and no mind.
"Where does teleological rivalry come into play for the Mind at Large?"
If I understand what you mean, Mind could first choose a desired outcome and then explore different threads of time and choose those that achieve that outcome, but Mind could also explore first without a defined teleological goal in mind and then choose. Or isn't this what you meant?
"What is OUR next experiment (does it merely emerge or does some create it?) and why does it ‘win’ over the others?"
I think emergence - true emergence, strong emergence - IS creation via downward causation. The creator is God, or Mind at Large, or the cosmic operating system (depending on the language you want to use), but we are integral and irreducible parts of the creator, so we have an input and a voice.
But let's move the discussion to the new book page
Thanks Philippe! Of course things always go slower than planned :-) The challenge is not what to put in the book (I could fill thousands of pages), but what to keep out of a book that I want short. I'm now planning to have a draft ready by the end of the year and publish the book in 2023. Of course I'll invite you to read the draft and I look forward to your feedback!
I plan to publish this book in one year or so, perhaps less. I have everything clear in my mind. Perhaps I should do a public stress test of my cosmology, inviting readers to ask any question to check if I have (conceptual, preliminary...) answers to everything. But I want the book to be short, streamlined, and easy to read, so writing the draft takes time. As usual I'll put a public draft out before publishing the book.
Thanks for sharing this. There is an implication of continuing dynamism as a primitive assumption for ‘existence.’ Does your intuition inspired by Gödel lead to The Mind at Large being ‘uncertain’ about dynamic experimental outcomes? Where does teleological rivalry come into play for the Mind at Large? What is OUR next experiment (does it merely emerge or does some create it?) and why does it ‘win’ over the others?
Hi Randall,
"There is an implication of continuing dynamism as a primitive assumption for ‘existence.’"
Yes, definitely. Existence is becoming.
"Does your intuition inspired by Gödel lead to The Mind at Large being ‘uncertain’ about dynamic experimental outcomes?"
I think so. It can be and it has been argued that WE are and can only be uncertain about the future, but Mind at Large (aka God) lives above time and sees all times at a glance. But then we must think of another time dimension (see last draft chapter about the cosmic operating system) in which Mind at Large thinks, because without change there's no thought and no mind.
"Where does teleological rivalry come into play for the Mind at Large?"
If I understand what you mean, Mind could first choose a desired outcome and then explore different threads of time and choose those that achieve that outcome, but Mind could also explore first without a defined teleological goal in mind and then choose. Or isn't this what you meant?
"What is OUR next experiment (does it merely emerge or does some create it?) and why does it ‘win’ over the others?"
I think emergence - true emergence, strong emergence - IS creation via downward causation. The creator is God, or Mind at Large, or the cosmic operating system (depending on the language you want to use), but we are integral and irreducible parts of the creator, so we have an input and a voice.
But let's move the discussion to the new book page
https://www.turingchurch.com/p/irrational-mechanics
Hi Randall, great questions! I’ll reply tomorrow. Meanwhile, since this page is old, would you mind copying this comment to the new book page:
https://www.turingchurch.com/p/irrational-mechanics
Fascinating! Ad astra!
Thanks Philippe! Of course things always go slower than planned :-) The challenge is not what to put in the book (I could fill thousands of pages), but what to keep out of a book that I want short. I'm now planning to have a draft ready by the end of the year and publish the book in 2023. Of course I'll invite you to read the draft and I look forward to your feedback!
Can't wait
I plan to publish this book in one year or so, perhaps less. I have everything clear in my mind. Perhaps I should do a public stress test of my cosmology, inviting readers to ask any question to check if I have (conceptual, preliminary...) answers to everything. But I want the book to be short, streamlined, and easy to read, so writing the draft takes time. As usual I'll put a public draft out before publishing the book.