----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Quentin Anciaux 
  To: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 9:19 AM
  Subject: Re: Quantum Immortality considering "Passing Out"





  2010/5/21 m.a. <marty...@bellsouth.net>


      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Stathis Papaioannou 
      To: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
      Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 4:35 PM
      Subject: Re: Quantum Immortality considering "Passing Out"






      On 20/05/2010, at 4:12 PM, "m.a." <marty...@bellsouth.net> wrote:


        I may have this all wrong, but it seems to me that for there to be 
umpteen trillion copies of a person there had to be umpteen trillion (UT) 
copies of his parents. And only a relatively small sub-group of those met and 
cohabited at the exact moment of his/her conception. But the same must have 
been true for their parents and their parents' parents and so forth back to the 
primoridal slime. And this staggering foliation of universes only covers one 
specific zygote of two specific gametes. What of all the other UT^UT 
combinations leading to the creation of other individuals just on this family 
tree? And what of all the other combinations and histories of every human, 
animal, insect and bacterium on this planet? Does it really make sense to 
assume numbers of universes so far beyond our ability to conceive of?    marty 
a.


      You may as well claim that an infinite single universe should not exist 
because it boggles the human mind.


      Stathis Papaioannou

      I don't know, Stathis. Somehow it seems easier for me to conceive of ONE 
infinite universe than to conceive of umpteen trillion trillion 
trillion^umpteen trillion trillion trillion^umpteen...universes. My "mind" is 
obviously more limited than yours.     m.a.


  Why in the first case you call it "infinite" and in the other "umpteen 
trillion trillion trillion^umpteen trillion trillion trillion^umpteen".

  Either case, it's infinite so your mind couldn't encompass what it is either 
way... Why choosing "one infinite universe" versus "an infinity of infinite 
universe" ?
  Stathis: This is of course entirely subjective, but I feel some conceptual 
grasp of one infinite universe probably because it's (only) ONE.  I'm 
comfortable with ONE of something. Trying to envision  an infinity of 
infinities seems rather hopeless because I can't even get through the first 
infinity...which leaves me no conceptual tool to deal with the second.  In 
other words, if I try to solve 
  infinity  x  infinity      the first part of the statement is so mysterious 
that I have no idea of how to use it to influence the second part. Hope this 
makes some sense.     marty a.


   

  Regards,
  Quentin


  -- 
  All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.


  -- 
  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
  To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
  For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to