What you say rings true!  Thanks for a breath of fresh air.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Porpora" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2004 1:32 PM
Subject: Strange Anthropic Probabilities

> Hi all,
> I have a query about Tegmark's argument I hope some of you might be 
> able to address.
> First, let me say I am not a physicist or computer science person but 
> a humble sociologist with some lay physics knowledge on this topic.
> Let me also say I find it a morally ghastly proposition that each of 
> us is duplicated an infinite number of times in an infinite number of 
> universes.  If so, why ever bother to do the right thing?  Some 
> infinite set of me's will be doing the wrong thing, so why not be one 
> of them?
> So I have been thinking of possible counter considerations. Here is 
> one:  Is it possible that the parametric coincidences required for 
> the existence of advanced (beyond microbial) life are so improbable 
> that (i) even in the right kind of universe, advanced life is likely 
> to occur only once; and (ii) it requires an infinite number of 
> universes even to get one occurrence of a me-ish person?
> I am wondering whether probabilistically, (ii) is a coherent 
> theoretical possibility. It seems to suggest a probability that would 
> be represented as (1 / infinity) or perhaps as the limit as N goes to 
> infinity of 1 / N.
> Then, according to this scenario (I think), the likelihood of a 
> me-ish person is equal to the limit as N goes to infinity of N * (1 / 
> N) = 1.
> As I say, I am just a sociologist, not a mathematician. So I don't 
> know whether what I am suggesting is plain nonsense.  It is certainly 
> speculative, but no more so than Tegmark's scenario.
> Thanks for any feedback.
> doug
> -- 
> doug porpora
> dept of culture and communication
> drexel university
> phila pa 19104

Reply via email to