Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

What is Telic Recusion?

dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 6:25:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Telic Recursion is concept proposed by Chris Langan in the CTMU. Most people seem to find it incomprehensible. This thread is meant to clarify what Telic Recursion means for those who are genuinely curious.

To begin with, one must understand what standard recursion is. Recursion is when rules are applied to a set of values to manipulate them into new values, and are then applied yet again to the new set of values to generate new values, and so on. This sort of process is entirely deterministic, in that the entire history of the process is implicit in any "moment" of the process. It is thus not a source of information, since no information is really created; all of the information "generated" owes to (is an expression of) the starting configuration and rules, which are themselves left unexplained.

Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms. Telic Recursion describes the process by which these two components are brought together to create information. Telic Recursion says that syntax and state are brought together under the guidance of teleology, whose only purpose is to maximize self-defined utility, a generalized property of information which "directs" the configuration of syntax and state. The force responsible for generating information is timeless, in the sense that time is "emergent" through it, and is "pre-informational" in the sense that it consists not of information, but of the "sense" in which configurations of syntax and state are judged to be part of reality's definition or not part of it (ultimately). Accordingly, reality sets up "dialectic" in which syntax and state talk to each other, and are subsequently refined, according to the mandate set by teleology. Teleology can be thought of as the "intrinsic asymmetry" of a zero-informational domain; no constraint means there's nothing to prevent the emergence of constraint. Thus, the self-configuring universe can be thought of as a self-constraint of UBT (the zero-information domain). In other words, reality is just "zero-constraint" in a different from i.e., the lack of constraint lacking even its lack of constraint.

There's more to it than that of course (there are dozens of corollary concepts involved) but hopefully this will give you guys at least some idea of what Langan is talking about.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2015 7:02:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 6:56:40 PM, kp98 wrote:
Ok - so what is TR for? What does it do?

TR is responsible for converting potentiality into actuality in a self-contained and consistent way.
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 6:22:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 6:25:05 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Telic Recursion is concept proposed by Chris Langan in the CTMU. Most people seem to find it incomprehensible. This thread is meant to clarify what Telic Recursion means for those who are genuinely curious.

To begin with, one must understand what standard recursion is. Recursion is when rules are applied to a set of values to manipulate them into new values, and are then applied yet again to the new set of values to generate new values, and so on. This sort of process is entirely deterministic, in that the entire history of the process is implicit in any "moment" of the process. It is thus not a source of information, since no information is really created; all of the information "generated" owes to (is an expression of) the starting configuration and rules, which are themselves left unexplained.

Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms. Telic Recursion describes the process by which these two components are brought together to create information. Telic Recursion says that syntax and state are brought together under the guidance of teleology, whose only purpose is to maximize self-defined utility, a generalized property of information which "directs" the configuration of syntax and state. The force responsible for generating information is timeless, in the sense that time is "emergent" through it, and is "pre-informational" in the sense that it consists not of information, but of the "sense" in which configurations of syntax and state are judged to be part of reality's definition or not part of it (ultimately). Accordingly, reality sets up "dialectic" in which syntax and state talk to each other, and are subsequently refined, according to the mandate set by teleology. Teleology can be thought of as the "intrinsic asymmetry" of a zero-informational domain; no constraint means there's nothing to prevent the emergence of constraint. Thus, the self-configuring universe can be thought of as a self-constraint of UBT (the zero-information domain). In other words, reality is just "zero-constraint" in a different from i.e., the lack of constraint lacking even its lack of constraint.

There's more to it than that of course (there are dozens of corollary concepts involved) but hopefully this will give you guys at least some idea of what Langan is talking about.

I get it now ... it was incomprehensible till Bossy explained it to me, and this is equally simple. Before that, all I got was incoherent, lol.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 6:44:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
TR is responsible for converting potentiality into actuality in a self-contained and consistent way.

I understand most all the words in that sentence, but not when they are put together.

Any chance of a worked example?
Sosoconfused
Posts: 237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2015 11:19:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/13/2015 6:25:05 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Telic Recursion is concept proposed by Chris Langan in the CTMU. Most people seem to find it incomprehensible. This thread is meant to clarify what Telic Recursion means for those who are genuinely curious.

To begin with, one must understand what standard recursion is. Recursion is when rules are applied to a set of values to manipulate them into new values, and are then applied yet again to the new set of values to generate new values, and so on. This sort of process is entirely deterministic, in that the entire history of the process is implicit in any "moment" of the process. It is thus not a source of information, since no information is really created; all of the information "generated" owes to (is an expression of) the starting configuration and rules, which are themselves left unexplained.

Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms. Telic Recursion describes the process by which these two components are brought together to create information. Telic Recursion says that syntax and state are brought together under the guidance of teleology, whose only purpose is to maximize self-defined utility, a generalized property of information which "directs" the configuration of syntax and state. The force responsible for generating information is timeless, in the sense that time is "emergent" through it, and is "pre-informational" in the sense that it consists not of information, but of the "sense" in which configurations of syntax and state are judged to be part of reality's definition or not part of it (ultimately). Accordingly, reality sets up "dialectic" in which syntax and state talk to each other, and are subsequently refined, according to the mandate set by teleology. Teleology can be thought of as the "intrinsic asymmetry" of a zero-informational domain; no constraint means there's nothing to prevent the emergence of constraint. Thus, the self-configuring universe can be thought of as a self-constraint of UBT (the zero-information domain). In other words, reality is just "zero-constraint" in a different from i.e., the lack of constraint lacking even its lack of constraint.

There's more to it than that of course (there are dozens of corollary concepts involved) but hopefully this will give you guys at least some idea of what Langan is talking about.

I don't really like Langan.....it's my understanding that CTMU is basically a theory of definition, how the mind defines things and how it is defined.

One of the examples that I read explains Langan as basically saying: "For X to have property x, (not) X must have property x". So in order for Green to have the property green, Red must also have the property green.....

The other challenge that I've seen is the undefined nature of Langan's arguments. He uses a lot of jargon which he either defines poorly or not at all.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 2:43:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 11:19:47 PM, Sosoconfused wrote:
At 7/13/2015 6:25:05 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Telic Recursion is concept proposed by Chris Langan in the CTMU. Most people seem to find it incomprehensible. This thread is meant to clarify what Telic Recursion means for those who are genuinely curious.

To begin with, one must understand what standard recursion is. Recursion is when rules are applied to a set of values to manipulate them into new values, and are then applied yet again to the new set of values to generate new values, and so on. This sort of process is entirely deterministic, in that the entire history of the process is implicit in any "moment" of the process. It is thus not a source of information, since no information is really created; all of the information "generated" owes to (is an expression of) the starting configuration and rules, which are themselves left unexplained.

Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms. Telic Recursion describes the process by which these two components are brought together to create information. Telic Recursion says that syntax and state are brought together under the guidance of teleology, whose only purpose is to maximize self-defined utility, a generalized property of information which "directs" the configuration of syntax and state. The force responsible for generating information is timeless, in the sense that time is "emergent" through it, and is "pre-informational" in the sense that it consists not of information, but of the "sense" in which configurations of syntax and state are judged to be part of reality's definition or not part of it (ultimately). Accordingly, reality sets up "dialectic" in which syntax and state talk to each other, and are subsequently refined, according to the mandate set by teleology. Teleology can be thought of as the "intrinsic asymmetry" of a zero-informational domain; no constraint means there's nothing to prevent the emergence of constraint. Thus, the self-configuring universe can be thought of as a self-constraint of UBT (the zero-information domain). In other words, reality is just "zero-constraint" in a different from i.e., the lack of constraint lacking even its lack of constraint.

There's more to it than that of course (there are dozens of corollary concepts involved) but hopefully this will give you guys at least some idea of what Langan is talking about.

I don't really like Langan.....it's my understanding that CTMU is basically a theory of definition, how the mind defines things and how it is defined.

One of the examples that I read explains Langan as basically saying: "For X to have property x, (not) X must have property x". So in order for Green to have the property green, Red must also have the property green.....


As someone who has read virtually all of Langan's published material and discussions, I have no idea what this is referring to. Maybe it's referring to his assertion that in order for something to be well-defined, it must have a negation. Mind linking to the example?

The other challenge that I've seen is the undefined nature of Langan's arguments. He uses a lot of jargon which he either defines poorly or not at all.

Example?
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 2:44:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/14/2015 6:44:36 AM, kp98 wrote:
TR is responsible for converting potentiality into actuality in a self-contained and consistent way.

I understand most all the words in that sentence, but not when they are put together.

Any chance of a worked example?

Yes you do. You just don't understand specifically how it works.
Sosoconfused
Posts: 237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 3:25:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 2:43:26 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 7/14/2015 11:19:47 PM, Sosoconfused wrote:
At 7/13/2015 6:25:05 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Telic Recursion is concept proposed by Chris Langan in the CTMU. Most people seem to find it incomprehensible. This thread is meant to clarify what Telic Recursion means for those who are genuinely curious.

To begin with, one must understand what standard recursion is. Recursion is when rules are applied to a set of values to manipulate them into new values, and are then applied yet again to the new set of values to generate new values, and so on. This sort of process is entirely deterministic, in that the entire history of the process is implicit in any "moment" of the process. It is thus not a source of information, since no information is really created; all of the information "generated" owes to (is an expression of) the starting configuration and rules, which are themselves left unexplained.

Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms. Telic Recursion describes the process by which these two components are brought together to create information. Telic Recursion says that syntax and state are brought together under the guidance of teleology, whose only purpose is to maximize self-defined utility, a generalized property of information which "directs" the configuration of syntax and state. The force responsible for generating information is timeless, in the sense that time is "emergent" through it, and is "pre-informational" in the sense that it consists not of information, but of the "sense" in which configurations of syntax and state are judged to be part of reality's definition or not part of it (ultimately). Accordingly, reality sets up "dialectic" in which syntax and state talk to each other, and are subsequently refined, according to the mandate set by teleology. Teleology can be thought of as the "intrinsic asymmetry" of a zero-informational domain; no constraint means there's nothing to prevent the emergence of constraint. Thus, the self-configuring universe can be thought of as a self-constraint of UBT (the zero-information domain). In other words, reality is just "zero-constraint" in a different from i.e., the lack of constraint lacking even its lack of constraint.

There's more to it than that of course (there are dozens of corollary concepts involved) but hopefully this will give you guys at least some idea of what Langan is talking about.

I don't really like Langan.....it's my understanding that CTMU is basically a theory of definition, how the mind defines things and how it is defined.

One of the examples that I read explains Langan as basically saying: "For X to have property x, (not) X must have property x". So in order for Green to have the property green, Red must also have the property green.....


As someone who has read virtually all of Langan's published material and discussions, I have no idea what this is referring to. Maybe it's referring to his assertion that in order for something to be well-defined, it must have a negation. Mind linking to the example?

The other challenge that I've seen is the undefined nature of Langan's arguments. He uses a lot of jargon which he either defines poorly or not at all.

Example?

http://www.megafoundation.org...

This whole paper.....it has absolutely no glossary, no explanation of terms, etc...56 pages of jargon...
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 4:54:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 3:25:59 PM, Sosoconfused wrote:
At 7/15/2015 2:43:26 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 7/14/2015 11:19:47 PM, Sosoconfused wrote:
At 7/13/2015 6:25:05 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Telic Recursion is concept proposed by Chris Langan in the CTMU. Most people seem to find it incomprehensible. This thread is meant to clarify what Telic Recursion means for those who are genuinely curious.

To begin with, one must understand what standard recursion is. Recursion is when rules are applied to a set of values to manipulate them into new values, and are then applied yet again to the new set of values to generate new values, and so on. This sort of process is entirely deterministic, in that the entire history of the process is implicit in any "moment" of the process. It is thus not a source of information, since no information is really created; all of the information "generated" owes to (is an expression of) the starting configuration and rules, which are themselves left unexplained.

Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms. Telic Recursion describes the process by which these two components are brought together to create information. Telic Recursion says that syntax and state are brought together under the guidance of teleology, whose only purpose is to maximize self-defined utility, a generalized property of information which "directs" the configuration of syntax and state. The force responsible for generating information is timeless, in the sense that time is "emergent" through it, and is "pre-informational" in the sense that it consists not of information, but of the "sense" in which configurations of syntax and state are judged to be part of reality's definition or not part of it (ultimately). Accordingly, reality sets up "dialectic" in which syntax and state talk to each other, and are subsequently refined, according to the mandate set by teleology. Teleology can be thought of as the "intrinsic asymmetry" of a zero-informational domain; no constraint means there's nothing to prevent the emergence of constraint. Thus, the self-configuring universe can be thought of as a self-constraint of UBT (the zero-information domain). In other words, reality is just "zero-constraint" in a different from i.e., the lack of constraint lacking even its lack of constraint.

There's more to it than that of course (there are dozens of corollary concepts involved) but hopefully this will give you guys at least some idea of what Langan is talking about.

I don't really like Langan.....it's my understanding that CTMU is basically a theory of definition, how the mind defines things and how it is defined.

One of the examples that I read explains Langan as basically saying: "For X to have property x, (not) X must have property x". So in order for Green to have the property green, Red must also have the property green.....


As someone who has read virtually all of Langan's published material and discussions, I have no idea what this is referring to. Maybe it's referring to his assertion that in order for something to be well-defined, it must have a negation. Mind linking to the example?

The other challenge that I've seen is the undefined nature of Langan's arguments. He uses a lot of jargon which he either defines poorly or not at all.

Example?

http://www.megafoundation.org...

This whole paper.....it has absolutely no glossary, no explanation of terms, etc...56 pages of jargon...

Provide an example of a term that wasn't explained, and I'll show you where it's explained/obvious given the context.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 5:22:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I won't ask for any clarification because you have already clarfied things in the OP. For instance you wrote:

"Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms."

If that's a clarification, I can't imagine what the original was like. Perhaps you need to clarify your clarification - hey! Now that's recursion!
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 6:07:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 5:22:41 PM, kp98 wrote:
I won't ask for any clarification because you have already clarfied things in the OP. For instance you wrote:

"Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms."

If that's a clarification, I can't imagine what the original was like. Perhaps you need to clarify your clarification - hey! Now that's recursion!

I'm not sure I can get much simpler than that, but I'll try.

Information = something (state) whose existence conforms to the rules (syntax) in terms of which that something is to be interpreted.

If this is still too much for you to handle, then I don't know what to say except for "Maybe philosophy isn't for you".
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 6:57:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 6:07:02 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 7/15/2015 5:22:41 PM, kp98 wrote:
I won't ask for any clarification because you have already clarfied things in the OP. For instance you wrote:

"Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms."

If that's a clarification, I can't imagine what the original was like. Perhaps you need to clarify your clarification - hey! Now that's recursion!

I'm not sure I can get much simpler than that, but I'll try.

Information = something (state) whose existence conforms to the rules (syntax) in terms of which that something is to be interpreted.

If this is still too much for you to handle, then I don't know what to say except for "Maybe philosophy isn't for you".

Obviously you can clarify it further. You haven't defined "syntax", "state", how syntax and state can be "bound", what a zero-informational domain is, what "informational potential" is, or what "informational forms" are. Why assume those terms should be understood in this context?
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 7:12:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/15/2015 6:57:22 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 7/15/2015 6:07:02 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 7/15/2015 5:22:41 PM, kp98 wrote:
I won't ask for any clarification because you have already clarfied things in the OP. For instance you wrote:

"Information consists of two components: syntax and state. That is, information amounts to something which exists in a certain way (which is just another way of saying that information consists of definition and definiendum). It follows that informational potential can be characterized by a zero-informational domain in which syntax and state are not yet bound together into informational forms."

If that's a clarification, I can't imagine what the original was like. Perhaps you need to clarify your clarification - hey! Now that's recursion!

I'm not sure I can get much simpler than that, but I'll try.

Information = something (state) whose existence conforms to the rules (syntax) in terms of which that something is to be interpreted.

If this is still too much for you to handle, then I don't know what to say except for "Maybe philosophy isn't for you".

Obviously you can clarify it further. You haven't defined "syntax"

Rules of structure and transformation (same as it is usually defined).

"state"

That to which rules apply; informational content (same as it is usually defined, at least implicitly).

how syntax and state can be "bound"

Mutual definition between them (constraint).

what a zero-informational domain is,

The superficial lack of definition and constraint.

what "informational potential"

The same as zero-informational domain. Since constraint and potential are opposites (one is what is not possible, while the other is what is possible), taking constraint to zero means infinite potential.

is, or what "informational forms"

Things that are informational i.e., can be distinguished from their negation.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2015 9:08:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Information - something (state) whose existence conforms to the rules (syntax) in terms of which that something is to be interpreted.

You are going too fast. You did want to explain things, so don't complain that someone is willing to be explained to. I'm slow but I generally get there.

So a concrete example of information would be what?