On 31 Aug 2005, at 17:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brent MeekerWhy do you think YD is inconsistent with QM? Just to be clear: comp gives the comp-correct physics, and from what can be qualitatively and/or quantitatively already be derived, YD is inconsistent with SWE + collapse. I guess you mean QM = Copenhagen QM.
But YD entails much stronger form of non-locality! As, a priori, YD entails very strong form of non-locality. Proof: see the UDA in my URL.
No. If comp contradicts physics, it will be so by comp being much more non-local and much more non-deterministic (from the observers viewpoints). The mystery is that with comp physics could appears so much computational. Remember that if comp is true, whatever the physical universe appears to be it cannot be the output of a computation, nor can it be the result of a turing emulation other than a UD. Only the taking into account of incompleteness show that comp cannot be obviously false, as it could seem to be when you understand the hugeness of indeterminacy and non-locality it implies. remember also that comp (and thus YD ) is not incompatible with my brain being a quantum computer. Reason: quantum computer are classically emulable. You should read the proof, I think you have not yet grasped the enunciation of the result. It is all normal given the novelty. What seems to me to be less normal is that you don't want to read it and still want to say something. Bruno |
- Re: subjective reality Bruno Marchal
- Re: subjective reality kurtleegod
- Re: subjective reality Bruno Marchal
- Re: subjective reality kurtleegod
- Re: subjective reality Bruno Marchal
- Re: subjective reality kurtleegod
- Re: subjective reality John M
- Re: subjective reality Bruno Marchal
- Re: subjective reality kurtleegod
- Re: subjective reality Saibal Mitra
- Re: subjective reality Norman Samish