?
-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 11:29 PM
To: Fred Chen
Cc: 'Everything List'
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
It has nothing whatsoever to do with finite width of the absorber.
Adding an infinitesimally thin wire into the experiment
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:51 AM
To: Fred Chen
Cc: 'Everything List'
Subject: Re: Quantum Rebel
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:43:10PM -0700, Fred Chen wrote:
...
A better (and far simpler) way to challenge complementarity would be
to use a low-intensity
Eric,
It may not explain gravity but your phenomenon seems strikingly similar
(with its repulsive push picture) to the concept of cosmological constant or
quintessence, which has a great deal (it is believed) to do with the
expanding universe and its fate. See
Nice link, great topic.
This does beg the question, is there an event horizon for gravitons, and
presumably the answer for that would be the singularity.
Here is something to ponder: do virtual gravitons generate more virtual
gravitons? Consider a planet in circular orbit around its star.
Mirror matter is very interesting. It's an example where unbreaking a
symmetry (in this case 2-fold) results in an effectively parallel universe.
It makes me wonder if unbreaking an infinite-fold symmetry would similarly
generate a multiverse family, and what would this symmetry be?
-
-Original Message-
From: Fred Chen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
A codified description of how the all-universes model works would be
nice.
Will a program that executes all programs really suffice? It seems more
like
an analogy than an actual model. With a computational model
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:47 AM
Subject: Re: James Higgo
Dear Fred,
Thank you for your concer. Perhaps you could forward this notice to the
rest of the people on the list (I don't have access).
Many thanks,
I was shocked to hear of James Higgo's passing. I still
havehis replies to some of my postings. The multiverse concept is of
little comfort on occasions like these.
Fred
I don't see why we should limit ourselves to the simplest possible
universe
containing consciousness.
I would think that all worlds containing consciousness would be inhabited
naturally.
Joel
Actually I agree, fundamentally. Perhaps, there is just a gut feeling
around that simplest
Joel, thanks for your clarification.
Fred:
If two worlds within this everything are contradictory or not
consistent with each other, with no common ground, how exactly do
they interact?
Well I believe the universe is strictly local and completely homogeneous
at
the bottommost layer.
Joel, let's clarify our positions:
To be clear, I envision just one universe that contains everything.
Within
it may be many worlds or sub-worlds, but these are not independent. They
interact.
If two worlds within this everything are contradictory or not consistent
with each other, with no
Hello again Joel.
I think I can agree with you, in a pragmatic sense, with what you state
below.
I agree that any useful TOE should be able to be implemented on a (large
enough) computer. This computation can then SIMULATE the relevant or
important aspects of the universe we observe, or all
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 05/18/2000 1:41:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually, James, I read something wild into your sentence, interpreting
competition as the
selection mechanism. That does strike me as more promising than Occam's
Actually, James, I read something wild into your sentence, interpreting competition
as the
selection mechanism. That does strike me as more promising than Occam's razor. I am
interested
in pursuing this line of thought as a means of selecting not only ideas perceived to
be correct,
but also
How would you verify your Life pattern has achieved SAS status?
Ask it.
This is indeed a creative solution. You are presuming, though, that the SAS's in your
Life world will understand you. The only way you can know this is if you had encoded
their language/communication channel beforehand
interestingly still: when are *we* going to discover some CA or similar
which
turns out to be *our* universe? In my lifetime I hope.
Fred Chen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fred Chen, [EMAIL PROTECTED], writes:
When this game is run, complex patterns can emerge from simpler ones
I think there is an additional complication if you factor in the possibility of
duplicate universes, i.e., more than one instance of exactly the same universe,
with its unique history, observers, etc. This can provide a potential path for
weighting the probabilities, but only if you link the
Please retain me on the distribution list. The dialogs are beginning to
become interesting.
Thanks,
Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
32720 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You have been removed from the list.
If this wasn't your intention or you are having problems getting
18 matches
Mail list logo
