**From:** Stuart Armstrong (*dragondreaming@googlemail.com*)

**Date:** Mon Oct 12 2009 - 10:31:43 MDT

**Next message:**Robin Lee Powell: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Previous message:**Eric Burton: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**In reply to:**John K Clark: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Next in thread:**John K Clark: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Reply:**John K Clark: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

I apologise to get back into this, and I apologise for the somewhat

snarky tone of my previous post and this one, but I can't really let

this side any longer.

*> when I show that mathematicians have known for 75
*

*> years that a fixed goal mind won't work;
*

This is a lie. I am a mathematician, and have run this by some of my

colleagues who work in formal logic and theoretical computer science.

You are not "repeating what mathematicians have known", you are making

a new, and extraordinary, claim.

The onus is not on us to refute it, but for you to prove it. Start

with "Assume there exists a fixed goal mind that works" and work

though a series of logical steps to "Therefore there must exist an

algorithmic procedure for deciding if an arbitrary Turing machine

stops". Make sure each step is rigorous, and that the definitions are

clear and solid. Take your time.

I deliberately chose the contrapositive version (not B implies not A,

equivalent with A implies B), because it's easier to follow in this

case, and less easy to cheat in the reasoning chain.

So, are you up to the task? Since you affirm your statement with the

force of a mathematical theorem, are you ready to write out the proof

that would actually make it into such a theorem?

As I said before, apologies for the tone, but I feel there is no other

way of getting the point across.

Stuart

**Next message:**Robin Lee Powell: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Previous message:**Eric Burton: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**In reply to:**John K Clark: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Next in thread:**John K Clark: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Reply:**John K Clark: "Re: [sl4] Complete drivel on this list: was: I am a Singularitian who does not believe in the Singularity."**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5
: Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:04 MDT
*