Paddy writes

> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> > (b) In the multiverse, those worlds in which it is a frequent occurrence 
> > that the laws of physics are temporarily suspended so that, for example, 
> > talking white rabbits materialise out of thin air, may greatly 
> > predominate. However, it is no surprise that we live in the orderly 
> > world that we do. For in those other worlds, although observers very 
> > much like us may evolve, they will certainly not spend their time 
> > puzzling over the curious absence of white rabbit type phenomena. The 
> > mere fact that we are having this discussion therefore necessitates that 
> > we live in a world where physical laws are never violated, however 
> > unlikely such a world may at first seem. This is the *extreme* anthropic 
> > principle at work.

Might it not also seem more probable (upon some of the hypotheses
being entertained here) that observers *just* like us evolved, and
then just today white rabbits began to appear out of nowhere?

> Good point, this is a fundamental weakness of the AP. If you take it to 
> extremes, we should not be surprised by *anything* because the entire 
> history of our past light-cone to date, down to specific microscopic 
> quantum events, is required in order to account for the fact that you and 
> I are having this particular exchange.

But is "the entire history... down to quantum events"  really
necessary to account for this exchange?  I say this because the
set of all the observer moments *this* seems to require covers
so many possibilities, including schizophrenia, etc. But...
this being so tricky, how may I have misunderstood?


> To give the AP force, you have to 
> work on the most general possible level (hence it was a big mistake for 
> Barrow & Tipler to restrict it to "carbon-based life forms" in their book, 
> certainly not in line with Brandon Carter's original thought).
> Paddy Leahy

Reply via email to