There is also a thread with some other good justifications for the belief in
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the most convincing approach is to start with how unlikely a
> universe with life is. I like how Loenard Susskind explains it here:
> There are a few other approaches, such as how mathematical the universes
> is. "The unreasonable effectiveness of math", as well as the many 10^500 or
> perhaps infinite number of solutions to string theory, and also the
> informational simplicity of all possible structures existing. You can liken
> that simplicity it to a block of stone before it is sculpted. All possible
> sculptures exist within that block of stone, but only by adding information
> through chiseling, can one restrict from the infinite possibilities down to
> one structure. Therefore if the lack of any information leaves open all
> possibility. (as in Russell Standish's theory of nothing) If there is no
> force or entity that comes along to carve from all possible existence a
> single existence, then all possible structures continue to exist.
> I think the fine tuning argument is the strongest, if you can demonstrate
> that the chances of a universe having the right laws to support evolving
> life is less than 1 in a billion for example, then the likelihood of a huge
> or infinite number of universes existing is overwhelming.
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:05 PM, ronaldheld <ronaldh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jason(and any others)
>> Both. Level IV Universe is hard to explain even if real. Bruno's
>> reality is equally hard to convincing present.
>> On Nov 26, 12:02 am, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:50 PM, ronaldheld <ronaldh...@gmail.com>
>> > > Jason:
>> > > I see what you are saying up at our level of understanding, I do not
>> > > know how to present that in a technically convincing matter.
>> > > Ronald
>> > Which message in particular do you think is difficult to
>> > present convincingly? Tegmark's ideas that everything is real, or the
>> > suggestion that computer simulation might be a legitimate tool for
>> > exploration?
>> > Jason
>> 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
>> For more options, visit this group at
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
For more options, visit this group at