On Oct 25, 7:59 am, "Wei Dai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't care > about (1) and (3) because those universes are too arbitrary or random, and I > can defend that by pointing to their high algorithmic complexities.
In (3) the universe doesn't have a high aIgorithmic complexity. Any theory that just says "we only care about universes with low algorithmic complexity" leads to (3) (assuming that, by "the universe", you have the usual meaning of "that vast space we seem to live in" rather than "my immediate perceptions".) The specific reason I like UDASSA is because it gives you a framework for saying, "the universe, plus my index in the universe, has a low algorithmic complexity." --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
