Hi Russell,

   You'll see that I immediately followed my joining post with an ever-
so-slightly irate response to your comment ;-)  I need to go have
dinner with my family, so let me quickly say that taking existing as
an observer for granted is a very easy thing to do, but it well may
need an explanation :-)


On Jan 27, 5:18 pm, Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au> wrote:
> Hi Travis,
> Welcome to the list. Its great to see some new blood. I did get around
> to reading your paper a few days ago, and had a couple of comments
> which I posted.
> 1) Your usage of the term Physic Church-Turing Thesis. What I thought
> you were assuming seemed more accurately captured by Bruno's COMP
> assumption, or Tegmark's Mathematical Universe Hyporthesis. For
> instance, Wikipedia, following Piccinini states the PCTT as:
> "According to Physical CTT, all physically computable functions are
> Turing-computable".
> I guess one can argue about what precisely constitutes a physically
> computable function, but one implication of the PCTT would be that
> real random number generators are impossible, and that beta decay is
> not really random, but pseudo random. This is contradicted by COMP.
> But, this is only a debate about nomenclature, not about the worth of
> your paper.
> 2) There can only be a countable number of observers, but an
> uncountable number of bits of information, so I was suspicious of your
> Observer Class Hypothesis. However, it looks like I missed your use of
> the Faddeev-Popov procedure, which eliminates most of those uncountable
> bits of information, so the ball is definitely back in my court!
> BTW - I don't think the problem you are trying to solve with the OCH
> is a problem that needs solving - the reference class of Anthropic
> Reasoning must always be a subset of the set of observers (or observer
> moments depending on how strong your self-sampling assumption is).
> But it would nevertheless be intriguing if the OCH were true, and I
> could see it having other applications. Thanks for the notion.
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 01:10:50PM -0800, Travis Garrett wrote:
> > Hi everybody,
> >    My name is Travis - I'm currently working as a postdoc at the
> > Perimeter Institute.  I got an email from Richard Gordon and Evgenii
> > Rudnyi pointing out that my recent paper:http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.2198
> > is being discussed here, so yeah, I'm happy to join the conversation.
> > I'll respond to some specific points in the discussion thread, but
> > what the heck, I'll give an overview of my idea here...
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
> Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Mathematics                              
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
> 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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to