Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8622149" data-attributes="member: 71699">Again, with sufficent careful observation they can infer that certain circumstances or actions change the distribution of results of other actions: these are modifiers. Your explanation would amount to saying that modifiers are not simulationist, as they have no causal correlation with the cosmos.Their representation might differ, that's true: dice or not dice isn't at issue. Suppose that the inputs and results of a simulationist mechanic S correlates with a reference cosmos R. A modifier for S is a circumstance C. An imagined inhabitant of R can conduct the following experiment.Perform the action that S models - say throwing darts at a board. Where darts land is correlated with the results of S. (Otherwise S is plainly not causal.) Introduce a wide variety of circumstances that can bear on throwing darts on a board. Note down over many throws the differences in distribution of darts given the each circumstance. Among the list of circumstances there will be a C with a value sizing its influence on the distribution. In that way, the imagined inhabitant knows C is a modifer in the process S, and has a gauge of the size of C.I will simply emphasise here the exact and conscious wording of my proposed definition &quot;can know&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8622149, member: 71699"] Again, with sufficent careful observation they can infer that certain circumstances or actions change the distribution of results of other actions: these are modifiers. Your explanation would amount to saying that modifiers are not simulationist, as they have no causal correlation with the cosmos. Their representation might differ, that's true: dice or not dice isn't at issue. Suppose that the inputs and results of a simulationist mechanic S correlates with a reference cosmos R. A modifier for S is a circumstance C. An imagined inhabitant of R can conduct the following experiment. Perform the action that S models - say throwing darts at a board. Where darts land is correlated with the results of S. (Otherwise S is plainly not causal.) Introduce a wide variety of circumstances that can bear on throwing darts on a board. Note down over many throws the differences in distribution of darts given the each circumstance. Among the list of circumstances there will be a C with a value sizing its influence on the distribution. In that way, the imagined inhabitant knows C is a modifer in the process S, and has a gauge of the size of C. I will simply emphasise here the exact and conscious wording of my proposed definition "[B]can [/B]know". [/QUOTE]

Verification