2 + 2 = 4. Not all the godistic mathematical modeling you can imagine is going to change that.

Boru

(April 6, 2014 at 5:33 pm)Heywood Wrote: I tend to think that the Mandelbrot set or the Fibonacci sequence existed prior Benoit Mandelbrot or Leonardo of Pisa. But the debate on whether math is invented or discovered is really just a distraction that takes us away from the real question.

That's pure Platonism and it is absurd. And it is quite important to the discussion.

Quote:Can, in principle, a mathematical model of a brain capable of simulating a universe such as ours be created?

I don't see why it can't.

Of course it can be created. Not discovered - created.

(April 6, 2014 at 5:57 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(April 6, 2014 at 5:52 pm)tor Wrote: You can make a lot of models of things which don't exist.

Agreed.

A coherent model of a multiverse doesn't say anything about the actual existence of said multiverse until there is some supporting observation.

Correct.
But the multiverse hypothesis is consistent mathematically with observable universe. Now go ahead and create mathematical model of a mind which is consistent with what we know about the universe.

(April 6, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Chas Wrote:

(April 6, 2014 at 5:33 pm)Heywood Wrote: I tend to think that the Mandelbrot set or the Fibonacci sequence existed prior Benoit Mandelbrot or Leonardo of Pisa. But the debate on whether math is invented or discovered is really just a distraction that takes us away from the real question.

That's pure Platonism and it is absurd. And it is quite important to the discussion.

Quote:Can, in principle, a mathematical model of a brain capable of simulating a universe such as ours be created?

I don't see why it can't.

Of course it can be created. Not discovered - created.

We must be careful here, some things are purely qualitative not quantitative. Things such as free will, self awareness and emotions are very difficult if not impossible to evaluate or describe mathematically, at least we haven't gotten there yet. And we can't ignore them either because they do exist in the universe.

(April 6, 2014 at 7:21 pm)tor Wrote: Correct.
But the multiverse hypothesis is consistent mathematically with observable universe. Now go ahead and create mathematical model of a mind which is consistent with what we know about the universe.

Negative Tor,

Multiverse models say the laws of physics are different. Where in the observable universe have different laws of physics ever been observed?

(April 6, 2014 at 10:05 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(April 6, 2014 at 7:21 pm)tor Wrote: Correct.
But the multiverse hypothesis is consistent mathematically with observable universe. Now go ahead and create mathematical model of a mind which is consistent with what we know about the universe.

Negative Tor,

Multiverse models say the laws of physics are different. Where in the observable universe have different laws of physics ever been observed?

The laws of physics described in the multiverse model could produce our laws of physics. It has math backing it up.
Now go ahead and make your model.

(April 6, 2014 at 10:37 pm)tor Wrote: [quote='Heywood' pid='645747' dateline='1396836341']
The laws of physics described in the multiverse model could produce our laws of physics. It has math backing it up.
Now go ahead and make your model.

You want me to make a description of God using math? This might be hard....but I will give it a shot.

Let A = Omniscience.
Let B = Omnipotence.
Let C = Omnipresence.

God = A+B+C

Now that God has a mathematical description.....will you believe in him?

(April 7, 2014 at 12:03 am)Heywood Wrote:

(April 6, 2014 at 10:37 pm)tor Wrote: [quote='Heywood' pid='645747' dateline='1396836341']
The laws of physics described in the multiverse model could produce our laws of physics. It has math backing it up.
Now go ahead and make your model.

You want me to make a description of God using math? This might be hard....but I will give it a shot.

Let A = Omniscience.
Let B = Omnipotence.
Let C = Omnipresence.

God = A+B+C

Now that God has a mathematical description.....will you believe in him?

Let A = pound
Let B = rock
Let C = salt

god can pound rock salt !!

(April 7, 2014 at 12:03 am)Heywood Wrote:

(April 6, 2014 at 10:37 pm)tor Wrote: [quote='Heywood' pid='645747' dateline='1396836341']
The laws of physics described in the multiverse model could produce our laws of physics. It has math backing it up.
Now go ahead and make your model.

You want me to make a description of God using math? This might be hard....but I will give it a shot.

Let A = Omniscience.
Let B = Omnipotence.
Let C = Omnipresence.

God = A+B+C

Now that God has a mathematical description.....will you believe in him?

I still can't find god in my cup so no.