George Levy writes:
>Russell Standish is as infinite as the continuum, and in 
> fact there is a path along the Russell Standish continuum that eventually 
> becomes George Levy. 

Russell Standish Responds
>No - I don't believe this is true in the MWI of Quantum Mechanics. It
>may be true of the complete everything universe - as really wierd
>stuff can happen there.



I am sorry that Russell did not appreciate the idea of being morphed into me. 
I think he would have liked the experience.


George Levy writes:
>So we are all in a sense related through all the 
> conscious points (locus of consciousness?) in the MW that separate us. :-)

Russel Standish replies:
>Or perhaps reread the elementary QM textbooks. There does appear to be
>a lot of confusion over precisely what the multiverse is (Not the same
>as the Everything universe of Tegmark), of measure, of time etc. I
>applaud Jacques' attempts at clarifying these ideas and keeping us
>honest. There will of course be several different measures applicable
>to different sets. For example Wei Dai's universal measure (which
>applies minimally over bitstrings representing different possibility)
>is completely unrelated to measure induced by the "wavefunction of the
>universe" in MWI, that Jacques refers to. The measure referred to in
>RSSA is most likely the same as the MWI measure, rather than some
>concept of number of differentiated classical states (eg concsious
>states), particularly as the latter has the property of growing
>exponentially with time.


Why should we restrict our scope of the universe to anything less than what 
is necessary to maintain us alive? In fact in the presence of QS, the 
effective size of the Universe will increase to whatever it takes to keep us 
alive! If the size of the universe as defined by the MWI is not sufficiently 
large than by all means we are jutified by the WAP to increase its size. The 
problem is not how we could justify QS but how we can avoid the weird stuff 
that happens when our scope is too big. But here again we can use WAP to 
define the limits and eliminate the weird stuff.

I think that we must take the bull by the horns and in the absence of 
**sufficient reason**, face the possibility of living in the Plenitude or the 
Everything Universe. The challenge is to bridge the gap between this infinity 
and our observable world and to show the power of the WAP to do so.

George

Reply via email to