Le 08-mai-07, à 04:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :

> Say what!!  this is not a valid analogy since the laws of physics are
> absolutely the fundamental level of reality, where as dsecriptions of
> chimpanzee behaviour are not.

What makes you so sure. This is a physicalist assumption, and it  has 
been shown non compatible with very weak form of mechanism.

> 'The Laws of Physics'  don't refer to human notions (they certainly
> are not regarded that way by scientists - the whole notion of an
> objective reality would have be thrown out the window if we thought
> that there were no objective laws of physics since as mentioned,
> physics is the base level of reality), but are precise mathematical
> rules which have to be (postulated as) *universal* in scope for the
> scientific method to work at all.

Actually, although the current laws of physics does not refer to 
humans, they do refer to observers, if not only through the notions of 
observable and measurement..
With Everett, the observer can be "just" a memory machine. Once a 
machine,  the laws of physics have to emerge from something else, like 
number or information science/computer science, or mathematics.

You are perhaps confusing the notion of objective reality with the 
physicalist assumption that the objective reality is the physical 
reality. This has never been proved, and indeed is already jeopardized 
independently by both the quantum facts and simple hypotheses, like the 
finiteness of some possible representations of the observers.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to