Le Vendredi 24 Mars 2006 13:07, 1Z a écrit :
> Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> > Le Jeudi 23 Mars 2006 22:39, 1Z a écrit :
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > He has proven beyond doubt, using Godellian arguments, that some
> > > > numbers or intrinsically random .ie. that there is NO formulaic
> > > > prescription that will reach that number from any starting point.
> > >
> > > If Mathematical Platonism is true, they exist anyway !
> > >
> > > What is not clear is why equations are important. Phsyics uses them,
> > > but
> > > physics is based on the idea that some logivally possible laws are
> > > real and others aren't, not on the idea that everymathemtical object
> > > is equally real.
> >
> > I disagree, physics is based on the idea that the world we *perceive* is
> > predictable/understandable. As you are *not* in every mathematical
> > object, you can't perceive more than the world you are embedded into.
>
> That would follow if "word" is taken in a physical sense, but it
> far from clear that it would still be the case mathematically.
>
> If the set {1,2,3,4}
> exists platonically, and the set
> {1023,1024,1025,1026}
> all the intersections and unions thereof exist, e.g. the set
> (1,2,1023,1024}
> exists (for all that it doesn't seem particularly intuitive).
>
> Likewise if
> {<mathematical description of me>, <mathematical description of my
> world>}
> exists, and the set,
>
> {<mathematical description of Harry Potter>, <mathematical description
> of Harry Potter's world>}
>
> exists, then the set
>
> {<mathematical description of me>, <mathematical description of Harry
> Potter's world>}
> exists.

I agree, but there is a difference to say that your existense is consistent 
when spanning over these universe and to say that you know with the 
information available that you are in a HP universe. Yes you are consistent 
with a universe with real sorcerer in it, yet till the time you are not aware 
of it you cannot say I'm in a HP universe, because you are only consistent 
with it, you would be able to say it when you would get more information 
(hence there will be a you who is in a HP consistent history (because you now 
it's real) and another you who's still in the fuzzy set HP/~HP.

> >That doesn't
> > mean other "laws" could not rule other "parallel" universes.
>
> We've been here before: if there is a law that parallel universes do
> not overlap,
> that is itself only one mathematical possibility, and there must be
> other regions
> of the Mathematical Multiverse where it doesn't apply.

I do not see why histories could not overlap, note the whole point of the 
computational theory is that *you* (at time t) are part of all computations 
(infinite number of) that goes throught your state... so in this definition 
you always are part of an infinite superposition/overlapping of history 
consistent with your current knowledge of the world. 

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