Le 07-févr.-07, à 18:06, Torgny Tholerus a écrit :
> Mark Peaty skrev: And next: what do you mean by 'exist'?
> Our Universe is a mathemathical possibility. That is why our
> Universe exists. Every mathematically possible Universe exists in the
> same way. But we can not get in touch with any of the other
> Universes, so from our point of view does the other Universes not
If comp is true, the "physical" universe is not a mathematical
possibility. It is something much more deeply related to mathematics.
With the comp hyp "physical universes" emerge necessarily from the
interference of all mathematical possibilities, and the physical laws
are the invariant of such possibilities for their internal local
This entails we *are* in touch with the other universes, and they do
exist from our point of view. It is just an open problem if QM really
confirms this easily (cf UDA+movie-graph) derivable, from comp, fact.
This is what I try to explain in this list since the beginning (and
elsewhere before). Tegmark and Schmidhuber have missed this fundamental
point. Schmidhuber missed it by his refusal to distinguish between 1
and 3 person points of view, and Tegmark missed it by not postulating
the comp hyp (making a little bit "physics" just a geography.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at