On 7/2/2012 12:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 2:01 PM, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 7/2/2012 11:21 AM, Jason Resch wrote:On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:12 PM, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 7/2/2012 7:36 AM, Jason Resch wrote:Do you really not see any difference between tables and chairs and people and numbers, Chairs and people are also mathematical objects, just really complex ones with a large information content. This is the necessary conclusion of anyone who believes physical laws are mathematical.No, it's a necessary conclusion of anyone who cannot distinguish a description from the thing described. I think the identity of indiscernibles applies: If no distinction can ever be made (by observers within a mathematical universe and observers within a physical universe) then there is no distinction. You are using "physical" as an honorific, but it adds no information.I can point to a chair and say "This!"Yes, but how do you know you are pointing to a "physical chair", rather than a "mathematical chair"?
I know I'm pointing at a chair. I don't know what at 'mathematical chair' is. Can you point out how it is different from a chair?
Also, the "point test" fails to work for past or future times, different branches of the wave function, etc.
But it's fundamental. All the others depend on it through physical links. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
