Hi selva,

On 16 May 2011, at 16:49, selva wrote:

Considering only our world in the many world interpretation,it is a
separate causal domain..
there is no domain shear between the different domains(different
parallel worlds)..i.e.there is decoherence..
It is known that in our causal domain,there is cause and effect
relationships..
everything is happening because of a cause..everything is as it is
because it ought to be such.
There is a grand flow in the varying positions of atoms constituting
the universe..
If this is right,

This can't be right, if we assume that the brain (or whatever capable of sustaining consciousness) can be emulated by a Turing machine, as most people believe.




then how can we say ,we have free will ?

A determinist theory of free will is possible. What counts is that no machine can determine itself completely, so that the determinism of his/her behavior is known only by "God", not by the machine, nor by machine of equivalent complexity. Now, if you mean that free will is the capacity to disobey to arithmetic, then it does not exist, most probably.




why is there binary state at all ?

OK. You could have asked equivalently: why is there natural numbers? Logicians have shown last century that this is impossible to answer. Actually we need the natural numbers to ask "why natural numbers". They cannot be recover from any simpler theory. So we have to have some faith in them. It is part of the initial postulates.



if there is free will,how can we say everything affects everything ?
why is the 50-50 probability arises ?

Such a probability can be explained by self-duplication. If you are a machine, I can scan you (in principle) and duplicate you in two different places. You cannot predict in advance what will be your subjective experience after the duplication. BTW, this can be used to explain that free-will is not explainable by the use of indeterminacy.



why is there probability functions at all ?

Assuming we are digital machines, the answer is that the reality of realities is very huge. There is an infinity of computations going through your actual state of mind, and computer science explains why no machine can know which computations, nor even which sheaf of computations support it. There is automatically a statistics for the observable.



If the positions of the atoms in my mind(my thoughts) now affect the
positions of the atoms in your brain(your thoughts) ,then does it mean
you don't have a free will ?

Why? On the contrary. To have free will you must have some ability to make change around you. You certainly need some amount of determinacy.



Is our consciousness part of the grand consciousness (the universe).

If by universe you mean "physical universe", it is not clear if that exist. Strictly speaking it is an open problem. With mechanism we can say that there are many dreams, and we can say that some dreams glue well together to form shared dreams. But it is not known if they glue so well as to define a singular physical universe, or even just a singular physical multiverse. Extremely hard question.



Are we like the white cells(individually conscious) in our body,to the
universe..?

You might be naive about "we", "body" and "universe". No problem, it is a tradition since theology has been abandon to politics 1500 years ago, in Occident. (Closure of Plato Academy in Athena, about 525 after JC).


Then above all,the real question is why is there parallel worlds at
all ?

If you accept the idea that your brain can be simulated at some correct level of substitution (so that you would survive a digital brain substitution), then the additive and multiplicative structure of numbers defines a vast "block mindscape", containing many dreams (as seen from inside). Some dreams glue and generate sharable (among collectivities of "universal numbers) deep histories, which are seen as universe appearance from their points views. The physical realm does not disappear, but is secondary to the "numbers dreams". The physical realm is still fundamental, but it is epistemological, not ontological. You might read the shortest paper(*) I wrote to sum up the consequences of taking seriously the *assumption* that we are Turing emulable. We discussed it a lot. Some have not yet seen the point, I'm afraid. I sum up it provocatively sometimes by saying that if we are rational machine, then we have to abandon the theology of Aristotle (atheism christianism etc.) for the theology of Plato (objective idealism, Pythagorism, some budhist and indian school or thought). In the first one there is an emphasis on the 'creation'. In the second one the creation is a sign of something else (actually arithmetic).
(*) http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html


everything affects everything or not ?

In which sense? In our local physical realm even a big supernova explosion far away, cannot affect you here and now. In the arithmetical realm every truth is connected, but perhaps in a more trivial sense. They are infinities of intermediate modalities.

Take it easy. We are in deep water. Ask any question.

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.

Reply via email to