Hi

Le Mercredi 22 Mars 2006 15:09, 1Z a écrit :
> As  I have pointed out, there is bound to be an equation to which
> any given number is the solution.

I don't understand this, could you explain a little bit more and/or point to 
the post where you discuss it ?

>
> > > -- in a broad sense of "I".
> >
> > This "I in a broad sense" does not make sense to me
> > If "I" fork, there will be two new "I" that will each
> > have their common (old) memories and their different
> > (new) ones. There will not be a single "I" that will
> > have the new memories of both.
>
> But both 'I's" will identify **themselves** as Geroges Quenot.

Yes, that's the first person inderteminacy which Bruno is talking about. You 
should also note that multiple "I" appears in every multiple/many world 
theories.

> > Even if we admit both statements above, I don't see any
> > problem with the idea that some of the forked "I" will
> > witness a HP universe.
>
> It's not observed !

Not observing something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And as George as 
pointed out, and as I said some months earlier, an "I" which do not observe 
strange thing happening will always wonder why he doesn't while one that will 
observe will no longer ask why... so by an anthropic like principle I could 
say that we can talk about why we do not observe such and such because we are 
not in a place where strange things happen.

> > Finally, I don't see what mathematical monism has to
> > do with that. The problem would be the same if one
> > had to explain why HP universes don't physically exist
> > (as being equally mathematically possible as ours).
>
> It's not the same problem, because the whole point
> of physical existence is that not all logical
> possibilities are instantiated.

What is physical existence ?

> (To put it another way: the point is to explain
> experience. Physicalism explains non-experience
> of HP universes by saying they don't exist. MM appeals
> to ad-hoc hypotheses about non-interaction. All explanations
> have to end somewhere. The question is how many
> unexplained assumptions there are).

How physicalism explain that something do not exists ? how physicalism explain 
from where physical world emerge ? How physicalism could explain an universe 
that has a beginning and (maybe) an end ? How time is related to 
physicalism ?

Regards,
Quentin

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to