As a quick contribution to the discussion:

1) What do we mean by the state of a universe?

I mean a fixed configuration.

2) What do we mean by the transition to the next state?

I mean a new fixed configuration is realized.
Successive fixed configurations are not joined by a continuum of 
intervening configurations rather the process is "quantified".

Since there is no "motion" Relativity is easy.

3) What do we mean by computational?

I mean that there is no input from an external random oracle.

Pseudo random number generators are not external random oracles but are 

4) In this scheme any "contemplation" is itself a succession of states of a 

5) I do not see universes as "splitting" by going to more than one next 
state.  This is not necessary to explain anything as far as I can see.

6) Universes that are in receipt of true noise as part of a state to state 
transition are in effect destroyed on some scale in the sense the new state 
can not fully determine the prior state.

7) annotation of my earlier post:

I see either a global computational arrival at a next state from the 
current state [type 1 universe or internal rules that are computational] or 
a transition to a next state that is at least partially the result of 
information received from an external random oracle [type 2 universe or 
internal rules that allow input from the external oracle].

I see both of these types of universes as essential in the ensemble [zero 
information requires no selected type - you can not have just type 1 or 
just type 2 universes] and also that they both randomly convert into their 
opposite type. [type 2 can have a dose of true noise that converts them to 
type 1,  and the need to avoid selection as an information generator 
requires that type 1 universes are also subject to true noise event though 
their internal rules are computational.  Such a dose of true noise can 
change them into type 2.]

Neither type seems to support the idea of decision dependent arrivals at a 
next state.   Further any illusion of a selection of a next state to be 
transitioned to [or any kind of hypothetical grasp of more than one future 
*] is already part of the next state or succession of states* which must 
have been either computationally or noisily arrived at.

*A given universe is in only one fixed configuration state - which actually 
defines that universe - and then it is in the next fixed configuration or 
it is partially destroyed by the transition.  I currently see no way that a 
fixed configuration can incorporate what I see as a a non fixed 
configuration - the grasp of two alternate futures.



Reply via email to