Argument for Ontic Pancomputational Theism from Emergent Spacetime

 ...argument for ontic pancomputational theism from integrated information and emergent spacetime...John konnor...


1) to resolve the AMPS blackhole paradox the external information has to be the same as the   information internal to the blackhole to maintain the  monogamy of entanglement


2) if to resolve the AMPS blackhole paradox the external information has to be the same as the   information internal to the blackhole to maintain the  monogamy of entanglement then the information external to a blackhole is connected by  planck scale wormholes to the interior ( ER Bridge).


3) the information external to a blackhole is connected by  planck scale wormholes to the interior( ER Bridge).(1,2 MP)


4) if the information external to a blackhole is connected by  planck scale wormholes to the interior (ER Bridge) then ER=EPR 


5) ER=EPR.( Susskind, Maldacena)  (3,4 MP)


6) if ER=EPR then spacetime is emergent from entanglement


7) spacetime is emergent from entanglement( 5,6 MP)( Van Raamsdonk)


8) if spacetime is emergent from entanglement then spacetime is correlated directly to entropic integrated information 


9) spacetime is correlated directly to entropic integrated information(7,8 MP)


10) if spacetime is correlated directly to entropic integrated information then spacetime is correlated directly to consciousness( integrated information theory of consciousness, quantum parallelism)


11) spacetime is correlated directly to consciousness( integrated information theory of consciousness, quantum parallelism) (9,10 MP)


12) if spacetime is correlated directly to consciousness( integrated information theory of consciousness, quantum parallelism) then an omniscient non physical consciousness ontologically preceeds all emergent spacetimes


13) an omniscient non physical consciousness ontologically preceeds all emergent spacetimes (11,12 MP)


14) if an omniscient non physical consciousness ontologically preceeds all emergent spacetimes then ontic pancomputational theism is the case


15) ontic pancomputational theism is the case(13,14 MP)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Argument for OPT from Information

 ...argument for ontic pancomputational theism...John konnor... 1) the universe is composed of information ( it from bit) 2) if the universe is composed of information then a  prior omniscient mind instantiated the universe's ontological concreteness 3) a  prior omniscient mind instantiated the universe's ontological concreteness (1,2 MP) 4) if a  prior omniscient mind instantiated the universe's ontological concreteness then God exists 5) God exists (3,4 MP)
Read more

Round square copula and the OA

 .... ontological argument from pancomputational universe/ roundsquare copula... john konnor... 1) for all x if x exists only in the mind then x's nature does not encode existence 2) if God does not exist only in the mind then God exists in reality C) God exists M!x: x exists only in the mind. exE!: x's nature encodes existence R!x: x exists in reality g=(ix)exE! 1. (∀x) M!x⊃~exE! 2. ~M!g⊃R!g 3. M!g.   (AiP) 4. Mg⊃~egE! (1UI) 5. ~egE!       (3,4 MP) 6.(∃x)[(exE!∧(∀y)eyE!.⊃    (x=y))∧~exE!]    theory of descriptions 7. (EaE!∧(∀y)eyE!⊃    (x=y))∧~eaE!  6 EI 8. ((∀y)eyE!⊃(a=y)∧eaE)∧~eaE! 7 commutation 9.((∀y)eyE!.⊃(a=y))∧(eaE!∧~eaE!) 8 association 10.(eaE!∧~eaE!) 9 simplification 11.~M!g (3-10 indirect proof) 12. R!g   (2,11 MP) Brief defense: Since the computational universe is a thick abstract tegmarkian math object which can be modeled in phase space, it follows something must be pure concrete existence by n...
Read more

A Modal Ontological Argument

 ...modal ontological argument...John konnor... 1) it is not the case that it is either not possibly the case that it is not possible that God does not exist or that it is necessarily not the case God exists C) God exists Let: G!= God exists p⊃□◇p      ( axiom B) Proof: 1)~(~◇~◇~G!∨□~G!)                P. 2)~~◇~◇~G!∧~□~G!                (1 DeM.) 3)◇□G!∧◇G!                                (2 M.E.) 4)~G!⊃□◇~G!                              ( I.Ax.B) 5)~G!⊃~◇~◇~G!                         (4 M.E.) 6)◇~◇~G!⊃G!                              (5 Contr.) 7)◇□G!⊃G!             ...
Read more