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.

## Advertising

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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---