[FRIAM] falsifying the lost opportunity updating mechanism for free will

[∄ uǝlƃ]

Do you mean "exogenous"? If so, I'm not asserting that it need be exogenous, only higher order. I.e. the composition of the distributions between 2 processes has to be a function of those distributions. In order for such a function to be a concrete mechanism, there has to be a mechanical memory of the entire distribution, which I think limits how Markovian it can be. This is part of why I talked about truncation in the original proposition. The scope of the composition function truncates the parts it ignores. And I can see how your river delta idea can be coerced to fit that. But I worry that it's too limiting and SteveS's comment about self-negating comes back into play. It's close to a strawman in that it'll obviously lack anything that even kindasorta looks like "free will".

On 6/22/20 12:46 PM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> In any
> case, I am unclear how the composition scope might need to be extraneous.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ