hypericin

Certainly not floating in space, but existing in a similar sense that numbers exist. There is no 1, 2, 3, floating in space, these numbers must be ins...

Information is not physical. If it was, it could not retain its identity as it propagates through completely different physical mediums. Information r...

Hmm. Either motion isn't physical, or maybe, just maybe, it is your definition of physical that is at fault.

We all think this never works. You know this doesn't work at low n, but think it does at high n. Therefore it is incumbent on you to find the special ...

Even in philosophy, I've wondered why red seems to be the go to example when discussing color. Red/orange might be the earliest colorful (not black/wh...

Sorry for the delay, I was camping and wasn't on here much. Not true, even though "artistic" is a poor choice of words on my part. A critic might say,...

When would a hunter gatherer actually need to distinguish blue from other colors? Red berries, green foliage, yellow flowers, but blue? It's not actua...

Probably. But the interesting part to me is exploring different aspects and arguments. it's pretty rich, for a logic puzzle!

It is not purely performative. If it was I'm sure the perfect logicians could find a way to skip it. After the guru speaks, everybody knows everybody ...

1. I know x 2. Everyone knows x 3. I know everyone knows x 4. Everyone knows everyone knows x. 5. I know everyone knows everyone knows x 6. Everyone k...

It's worse than your amended 2. It recurses endlessly. There is a fundamental problem. Whatever condition you think is sufficient ((1) in your case), ...

My last substantive reply he only replied to the first sentence, I suspected he didn't really read it

Did you read my last post? I don't want to repeat of you didn't.

If you are missing the need, you are missing it.

.You are missing the recursion. Once your list is fully expanded, #1 knows a fact, call it A: A: everybody knows that everybody knows guru can see blu...

Even in the case of two people, they are all distinct facts, all the way up. It's just that we lose our ability to mentally grasp them pretty fast.

By saying "better (or more artistic)" you are conflating evaluation and identification. We identify art by whether it is artistic or not. If A is more...

Number blues A B C... At n=3, A doesn't know B knows C sees a blue. At n=4, A doesn't know B knows C knows D sees a blue. And so on. Of course, every ...

This is the beating heart of the puzzle, if you can't answer this you don't understand the puzzle. It is not to synchronize, not to make the counterfa...

I think it would be art. The addition of salt, and the quantity added, is an aesthetic choice designed to modify mental state, in this case taste perc...

No. By "experience" I mean, experience by the five senses. The effect of a benzo is not in the taste, but requires absorption into the blood stream. D...

You seem to have ascribed a fair amount of doctrine to me that I have not explicitly set forth. I prefer P, Q. I do, and I've already offered it to yo...

Actually Michael still keeps green: So for this to be false, we must find some blue that can find some blue that they aren't sure knows green sees a b...

Hey no editing. For (1) to be false, blue A must see blue B , and know that B sees blue C, but not know that B knows that C sees a blue. This doesn't ...

And yet, it is wildly unintuitive that (1) is false when n=100, or 1000, or 10000, or...

Yeah, I follow, there is definitely a case to be made. This puzzle has been confusing the fuck out of me. The core problem is, I think you understand,...

My disagreement is that you need the guru to say something just to make the counterfactual work.

I no longer believe this either.

no

But there is NOT one blue eyed person. The logic just says, IF there is one blue eyed person, he would leave. He did not, therefore there is not one b...

I acknowledge it. But not that it is relevant to the counterfactual logic.

A = Only one Blue B = Everyone sees one blue C = Blue leaves on first night B A -> ~B A -> C Still valid.

I'm not sure about this. If we take as a premise that "everyone sees at least one blue", then the counterfactual still works: If there is one blue, he...

This is just what I was talking about. It seems so damn reasonable that at some n, they could skip the stupid guru, lock eyes, and start from there. L...

Since they are perfect logicians, anything that would have allowed them to synchronize and leave before the guru spoke can be ruled out, since they ar...

Ît does say Maybe they were literally there forever.

When b>=3, you absolutely DO know that. You can prove that everyone (including a real or hypothetical green) sees blue. The problem I see with @"Micha...

I mean, maybe, if everyone went through this problem, or similar, and perfectly internalized that lesson. But, they won't, and frankly we will probabl...

This is a stark example, but there have definitely been others, where it felt like something clearly was one way, when it turned out to be another. Su...

The point is, usually when things feel logically certain, we think we at least know that much. That feeling of logical certainty amounts to a kind of ...

Some of the uses of art I have in mind: mental stimulation. modulating mood. Experiencing intense emotions safely. Education. Passing the time. Having...

Damn it. I buy it now. @"unenlightened"had it worked out before I even typed anything. This brings up a related question I had thought of before: if i...

yeah that's the one I edited, I won't do that anymore.

I don't think so, but fair enough.

No, at b=2, every blue sees one other blue, and for all they know, that blue does not see a blue. oh wait... No, I was right, at b=2, a guru must see ...

At b=3, everyone can make the guaranteed true statement, "everyone must see at least 1 blue" At b=2 or b=1, this is not a true statement. So at b=3, b...

It's a valid deduction, but we already know from the outset that wishes are not horses, it tells us nothing new. Similarly, the blue would have left i...

I mean yeah, but... but... Why should the step "If there were one blue, they would leave on the first day" appear in the brains of perfect logicians w...

What's tripping me up is this: If only one person has blue eyes, the guru's statement is clearly informative: the person with blue eyes doesn't see an...

Ok, this one is really tricky, and I couldn't figure it out on my own. But it is still not adding up for me, something is off. From the start, everyon...