No, the Newtonian case would be such that the logical non-contradiction
requirement would be trivial as the number of physical alternatives that could
occur next per state is one, this generates a one to one to one to one to one
... type of sequencing. There is no “choice” in the Newtonian case. On the
other hand, in QM we have a clear example of irreducible and non-trivial
alternatives that could occur next per state. IN QM, observables are defined in
terms of complex valued amplitudes which do not have a well ordering as Real
numbered valuations do. Because of this fact we cannot assume that OMs exist
with an a priori well ordering. Time exists because everything cannot occur all
My argument is that the traditional notion of a measure does not apply
because we cannot assume the simultaneous co-reliability of OMs, thus the DA is
an artifact of misapplied statistics.
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: Against the Doomsday hypothesis
On 5/8/2011 7:53 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
I think that the ‘Surprise 20 Questions’ idea that John Wheeler
considered in his famous ‘It from Bit’ paper might be more appropriate. Any OM
that is a possible continuance of another OM must not contain information that
is inconsistent with any previous OM in its sequence, up to some constant that
relates to the upper bound on the resolving power of a typical measurement. We
additionally need to consider that possible interactions between physical
systems would also constrain the information in the OMs such that no OM in a
sequence could contain information that contradicts that of another that is
related to some separate but co-existing system.
Instead of thinking of the content of OMs in terms of some statistical
measure, I think that it might be a better idea to consider exactly how OM are
sequenced together such that the White Rabbit problem is minimized. This method
is what Pratt uses in his residuation idea in his process dualism solution to
the concurrency problem, where each state/event transition occurs so long as
both physical conservation laws and logical non-contradiction laws are upheld.
It seems to me that this bypasses the measure problem completely.”
It might bypass the measure problem if the world were Newtonian, i.e.
deterministic. But QM tells us that it isn't.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at