# Re: Niettzean Recurrence!

```Hi,

I need to issue a clarification. What the heck does inertia – the property of
remaining in a given state of motion unless acted upon by an external force
have - to do with Nietzian Recurrence? Consider the UD as eternally running.
Within it are all possible worlds expressed as strings of integers. What
prevents a given string from being arbitrarily extended by one more integer and
another and another and another ....? Nothing! Thus is the string happens to be
a particle moving through space, how would we code the effect of a force acting
upon that particle such that it experiences a change in its momentum? What
would distinguish the “force acting upon the entity” from the entity itself?```
```
How does a string of Integers alone code all of the interactions between
the entities that it represents? Oh, that’s right, if I assume ideal monism I
am not allowed to think that numbers “represent” physical events. In ideal
monism there is no physicality at all, there is only numbers and relations
between numbers encoded in the numbers themselves via Gödelization. So ok, we
can Gödelize the Gödel numbers and then Gödelize them again ab infinitum. So
far no problems. But how do we Gödelize the computation of whether or not a
smooth diffeomorphism exists between pair of space-time manifolds? Or more
generally, does there exist a Gödel number for a theory equivalent to a general
solution to an arbitrarily large NP-Complete problem? If there is then it might
lead to a proof that P = NP. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem

I confess that I still do not have a wording to express my thought on this,
but I need to put this claim out there.

Onward!

Stephen

From: Stephen Paul King
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: Causality = 1p Continuity?
Hi Bruno,

Sometimes I feel that you are not reading what I write at all. :(

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 1:03 PM
Subject: Re: Causality = 1p Continuity?
snip
> We need the physical world to be the interface between our
> separate minds,
> otherwise we will be trapped in the UD in endless
> Poincare recursions. This is the nightmare that Nietzsche saw.

[BM]I doubt this, but if that were true, that would not been a reason to
abandon comp. Only a reason to hope that comp is false. But comp is
not yet sufficiently developed to start having premature fear of it.

[SPK] Unless there is something that acts as a limit on the expressions of the
UD then how do we recover inertia?

--
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