On 4 February 2011 16:52, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

>> Yes, obviously.  But I'm querying why Bruno says that this world "has
>> to" be different from what comp predicts, given that comp itself can
>> only be true absent such difference.  It seems self-contradictory to
>> me.
>
> ?
>
> I am saying that IF comp is true, then the laws of physics are
> derivable/emerging on the computations, in the limit defined by the first
> person indeterminacy.
> So, for someone who want comp false, it has to hope the 'observed physics'
> is different from the comp extracted physics.

Yes, but on the other hand, failing to find such a discrepancy can't
prove comp true, simply not false (like any other theory).  That said,
given the degree of prediction, agreement with observation + Occam
would make a pretty robust case in its favour, to say the least.

So Colin would indeed have to demonstrate empirical disagreement with
comp to prove it false - that's what you meant by "has to".  But in
principle it's still open to him to have some form of non-CTM
natural-world theory that turns out to be in equal agreement with
observation, isn't it?  That's all I was asking.

David

>
> On 04 Feb 2011, at 13:45, David Nyman wrote:
>
>> On 4 February 2011 12:34, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> What I think I'm still missing is the precise significance of "has to"
>>>> in the above.
>>>
>>> If platonism/AR is false, there has to be a real physical world,
>>> because there is then no mathematical world for the appearance of
>>> a real world to emerge from
>>
>> Yes, obviously.  But I'm querying why Bruno says that this world "has
>> to" be different from what comp predicts, given that comp itself can
>> only be true absent such difference.  It seems self-contradictory to
>> me.
>
> ?
>
> I am saying that IF comp is true, then the laws of physics are
> derivable/emerging on the computations, in the limit defined by the first
> person indeterminacy.
> So, for someone who want comp false, it has to hope the 'observed physics'
> is different from the comp extracted physics.
>
> Bruno
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
> --
> 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
> 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-list@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