Thanks for the reference. Of course Lobo implicitly assume  
physicalism, so we cannot really built from that.

I guess you know that Gödel is the first one showing that there exist  
solutions of Einstein's GR equations with closed time loop.
Circling computations exist (trivially) in the universal deployment  
too, but they are eliminated in the ultimate measure because the set  
of such loops are countable. You can always bet you are not belonging  
to such loop. I would say (assuming comp).



On 04 Feb 2009, at 19:25, ronaldheld wrote:

> Bruno
> Have you seen this:
> V. Walsh, "A theory of magnitude:common cortical metrics of time, spce
> and quantity", trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 483 (2003)
>  This was a one reference in a  paper on time I just read today( Time
> and Causation
>                              Ronald
> On Jan 25, 3:02 am, "Alberto G.Corona" <> wrote:
>> Brent:
>> I tried to clarify my point of view  in my previous response. This is
>> my answer to these questions.
>> On Jan 25, 5:53 am, Brent Meeker <> wrote:
>>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>>> 2009/1/24 Alberto G.Corona <>:
>>>>> But the fact is that in our univese, glasses do recompose  
>>>>> themselves,
>>>>> the flame of the candles do recombines liberating oxygen and  
>>>>> make grow
>>>>> the candle, objects lighter than water sink. Why? because these  
>>>>> events
>>>>> exist in our space time; Just go in the reverse time dimension  
>>>>> in our
>>>>> space-time manifold  to see them. The laws of physics permits  
>>>>> them.
>>>>> They are just reversible chemical reactions, reversible object
>>>>> collisions at the particle or macroscopic level.
>>>>> In terms of our perception of time, the outcomes we see happens  
>>>>> just
>>>>> because they are cuasi-infinitely probable and the reverse
>>>>> counterparts, cuasi infinitely improbalbe. But, that is also an
>>>>> illlusion of the arrow of time, because , In terms of time- 
>>>>> agnostic
>>>>> spacetime manifold reasoning, our life vector in space-time go  
>>>>> along
>>>>> the increase of entrophy, not the other way around. That is: the
>>>>> outcomes of probability laws are a consequience of our  
>>>>> trajectory in
>>>>> space time. Why our life follow this direction?. The reason is
>>>>> computational, as I said before.
>>>> The question is often asked, why does time seem to progress in the
>>>> increasing entropy direction? But if time were in fact  
>>>> progressing in
>>>> the decreasing entropy direction, we would know no different. For
>>>> example, if we were living in a simulation where 2009 is run  
>>>> first and
>>>> 2008 is run second according to an external clock, we would not be
>>>> able to tell from within the simulation. The real arrow of time
>>>> question should be: why does entropy increase in the same  
>>>> direction in
>>>> every observed part of the universe?
>>> Right.  It's generally thought that the direction of increasing  
>>> entropy is
>>> defined by the expansion of the universe since the expansion  
>>> increases the
>>> available states for matter.  But it's hard to show that this must  
>>> also
>>> determine the radiation arrow of time.
>>> But at the micro-level of QM there is presumably no change in  
>>> entropy, the
>>> evolution is unitary.  So then the question becomes: Why the  
>>> approximately
>>> classical world, in which the coarse-gained entropy does increase?
>>> Brent
>>>> For only if the glass shattering
>>>> occurred in a direction different to that of the mind of the  
>>>> observer
>>>> would something unusual be noticed.- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> >

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

Reply via email to