On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 03:39:16AM -0700, Youness Ayaita wrote:

... Two approaches are physics is real (realism), and physics emerges
(idealism)

> It's a very trivial fact though that the two approaches are not
> equivalent. Nonetheless it's interesting to note it. I argue that we
> have good reasons to discard the second approach. The fundamental role
> will be assigned to the physical worlds (hence the title of this
> message). The difference between the two approaches leads to different
> expections to the question "What will I experience next?".
> Consequently it can be measured empirically. We find this result by
> observing that different physical worlds may produce the same observer
> moment (e.g. if the physical worlds differ in a detail not perceivable
> by the observer). This assigns a higher probability to the observer
> moment when chosen randomly in order to answer the question (it's
> multiply counted because it appears more than once in the everyting
> ensemble). Opposed to this, every observer moment (in the RSSA within
> a given reference class) would have an equal probability to be
> selected if we used the second approach.

Successor observer moments are meant to be similar to their prior
OMs. By similar, I really mean differ by a single bit, but don't hold
me to that. I attribute this to the "heritability" requirement of an
evolutionary process, which I think the process of observation must be.

Once you have this requirement, the probabilities of sucessive OMs are
not all equal, and in fact I do demonstrate how the Born rule arises
in this context (Occams Razor, my Book). Its not going to be so easy
to distinguish realism and idealism, as the emergent reality in
idealism also "kicks back".

What will be the kicker is if the Anthropic Principle is ultimately
found to be incompatible with idealism. If the APP is not required,
then idealism will predict that we are all Boltzmann brains, and that no
evolution occurs. I think that there will be some psychological law
requiring self-awareness, entailing the embedding of the observer
in the observed reality, but it is still an open issue.


-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics                              
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia                                http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to