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. 


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 

Reply via email to