Where I am camping now, psilocybin is legal, so I went to the Farmers Market and bought a piece of chocolate and ate 5 squares (about 5 grams). I swam in the river and screamed madly at random passerby, birds mostly. It was great fun . . .
Mathematical Metaphysics? Isn't that aka Platonism? In Goedel's bullshit paper, his "undecidable sentence" 17 Gen r is syntactically identical to Sub(p(19,┌p┐)). Goedel himself states, "For metamathematical purposes it is naturally immaterial what objects are taken as basic signs, and we propose to use natural numbers for them.," and he develops his Goedel codes. Okay, but what happens if you sub the actual proposition instead of its Goedel number? It seems a most obvious question. Is Sub, a "recursive" binary function, still recursive under reflexivity? Why didn't dickhead address that?
Let T be an Universal Turing Machine, then the introduction of Sub(p(19,┌p┐)) leads to two distinct possibilities:
Case 1: T does not halt when given Sub(p (19,┌p┐)) as input, because is keeps finding free variables 19, leading to an infinite nested regress, then its very existence in system P is impossible without supplementing system P with, say, Peter Aczel’s Anti-Foundation Axiom, i. e. it is not recursive;
Case 2: T does halt when given Sub(p (19,┌p┐)) as input, then r = Sub(q (19,┌p┐)) is NOT a class-sign because it still contains two free variables, 17 and 19, which means 17 Gen r is not a sentence, in that IT contains the variable 19 free, and it makes no sense to discuss decidability without additional information.
In either case, Goedel's nonsense is still nonsense. Oh, and dig it, it was a Platonist Polemic directed at Wittgenstein, and maybe Brouwer as well . . .
I have a lot of respect for Ben, but sometimes I think he goes off the rails entirely.
Spacetime doesn't exist as a "body" out there; it emerges locally due to wave/particle duality and the existence of an upper bound on the velocity of matter/energy. Complex amplitudes in quantum theory come about due to complementarity, which necessitates the coupling of the probability density and the action on phase space.
Awareness is fundamental and it is empty of other, in the sense meant in the Zhentong Madhyamaka view; it is empty of what it is not. That is reality and everything else is just an emanation from that.
Oh, hell, I also wanted to share a couple of link-a-dinks with you, my friend;
https://youtu.be/ZVLHZ_w5A2s
https://youtu.be/loCBvaj4eSg
Where I am camping now, psilocybin is legal, so I went to the Farmers Market and bought a piece of chocolate and ate 5 squares (about 5 grams). I swam in the river and screamed madly at random passerby, birds mostly. It was great fun . . .
Why don't you invite Dzongsar Khentse Rinpoche to your little get together?
https://khyentsefoundation.org/who-we-are/our-founder/
https://khyentsefoundation.org/story/rinpoche-on-wisdom-ai-and-filmmaking/
Put a little wisdom in the driver's seat maybe?
Hey, Mathematical Metaphysics on YT wants to talk with you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkW2aI9iIRM
Mathematical Metaphysics? Isn't that aka Platonism? In Goedel's bullshit paper, his "undecidable sentence" 17 Gen r is syntactically identical to Sub(p(19,┌p┐)). Goedel himself states, "For metamathematical purposes it is naturally immaterial what objects are taken as basic signs, and we propose to use natural numbers for them.," and he develops his Goedel codes. Okay, but what happens if you sub the actual proposition instead of its Goedel number? It seems a most obvious question. Is Sub, a "recursive" binary function, still recursive under reflexivity? Why didn't dickhead address that?
Let T be an Universal Turing Machine, then the introduction of Sub(p(19,┌p┐)) leads to two distinct possibilities:
Case 1: T does not halt when given Sub(p (19,┌p┐)) as input, because is keeps finding free variables 19, leading to an infinite nested regress, then its very existence in system P is impossible without supplementing system P with, say, Peter Aczel’s Anti-Foundation Axiom, i. e. it is not recursive;
Case 2: T does halt when given Sub(p (19,┌p┐)) as input, then r = Sub(q (19,┌p┐)) is NOT a class-sign because it still contains two free variables, 17 and 19, which means 17 Gen r is not a sentence, in that IT contains the variable 19 free, and it makes no sense to discuss decidability without additional information.
In either case, Goedel's nonsense is still nonsense. Oh, and dig it, it was a Platonist Polemic directed at Wittgenstein, and maybe Brouwer as well . . .
I have a lot of respect for Ben, but sometimes I think he goes off the rails entirely.
https://www.mdpi.com/2673-9984/3/1/9
Spacetime doesn't exist as a "body" out there; it emerges locally due to wave/particle duality and the existence of an upper bound on the velocity of matter/energy. Complex amplitudes in quantum theory come about due to complementarity, which necessitates the coupling of the probability density and the action on phase space.
Awareness is fundamental and it is empty of other, in the sense meant in the Zhentong Madhyamaka view; it is empty of what it is not. That is reality and everything else is just an emanation from that.