These models with topological non-local features may not actually have "outsides" by the same token that the Mobius band only has one side, get it? Max Tegmark is a nice kid but he does not seem to deal very well with his own finitude ! I am sure he is not the only one...
-Joao Leao Norman Samish wrote: > To repeat Tegmark's rhetorical question (and he's probably not the > originator), "If the multiverse is finite, what's outside it's edge?" > > Norman > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mirai Shounen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Federico Marulli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:14 PM > Subject: Re: a possible paradox > > > Actually I wasn't thinking about "physically impossible things happening > > very rarely" (QM) but only about regular physics vs probability of things > > happening. > > > > If you consider quantum mechanics you are right in an infinite universe > > there could be areas in which physics just happens to work very > differently, > > people there would formulate very different physical laws (if people could > > evolve, or spontaneously appear). > > > > So if the universe is infinite, it doesn't make much sense to talk about > > laws of physics. Still there need to be some fundamental rules that never > > change, for example the fact that something exists. You can't have areas > of > > the universe in which the universe itself does note exist (I think). > > > > Frankly I don't believe the universe is infinite, occam's razor says it's > > just very big. > > Last month there was a report about someone finding a pattern in galaxies > > that would suggest the universe is much smaller than we thought but light > > "wraps around" making it appear infinite... the theory was discarded very > > soon after more experiments were carried out, but it reminded me of that > > star trek episode.. "state the nature of the universe" - "the universe is > a > > hollow sphere 12 km in diameter" ... or something. > > > > Infinity is just our perception of things very big... something that > > originates from nothingness and expands has very little chances of > becoming > > infinite in finite time. > > > > > > mirai++ > > > > > > I think two things are being confused. First, the laws of physics, > > second, > > > > the laws of probability. A gas particle follow physical rules > (movement, > > > > bumping, thermal vibrations) and lots of gas particles together follow > > > > probability rules (low probability of people suffocating in rooms). > > > > > > The problem is that all the laws of physics have been found observing > the > > > world around us in an experimental way. But all the outcomes of an > > > experiment are probabilistc and we know the low of physics only with a > > > certain error. So the paradox in the laws of probability is a paradox in > > > laws of physics too. The whole physics is probabilistic. > > > > > -- Joao Pedro Leao ::: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics 1815 Massachussetts Av. , Cambridge MA 02140 Work Phone: (617)-496-7990 extension 124 Cell-Phone: (617)-817-1800 ---------------------------------------------- "All generalizations are abusive (specially this one!)" -------------------------------------------------------