On 30 Aug 2012, at 04:40, Terren Suydam wrote:

## Advertising

hmmm, my interpretation is that in platonia, all computations, all the potential infinities of computations, have the same ontological status. Meaning, there's nothing meaningful that can be said with regard to any particular state of the UD - one can imagine that all computations have been performed in a timeless way.

`OK. And not only they all exist, (in the same sense as all prime`

`numbers exist), but they all exist with a particular weighted`

`redundancy, independent of the choice of the U in the UD.`

If so, it follows that the state that corresponds to my mind at this moment has an infinite number of instantiations in the UD (regardless of some arbitrary "current" state of the UD). In fact this is the only way I can make sense of the reversal, where physics emerges from "the infinite computations going through my state".

That's correct.

Otherwise, I think the physics that emerges would depend in a contigent way on the particulars of how the UD unfolds.

Yes.

Whether the infinities involved with my current state are of the same ordinality as the infinitie of all computations, I'm not sure. But I think if it was a "lesser" infinity, so that the probability of my state being instantiated did approach zero in the limit, then my interpretation above would imply that the probability of my existence is actually zero. Which is a contradiction.

`This does not necessarily follows. We can be relatively rare. To`

`exists more than an instant, we need only to have enough normal`

`computations going through or state, but the initial state can be`

`"absolutely" rare. The same might be true for the origin of life.`

`Logically, as I am agnostic on this, to be sure.`

Bruno

TerrenOn Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>wrote:But there are no infinities at any give state - only potentialinfinities.Of course that also implies that "you" are never complete, since atanygiven state in the UD there still remain infinitely manycomputations thatwill, in later steps, go through the states instantiating "you". Brent On 8/29/2012 9:04 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:It may not even be zero in the limit, since there's an infinity of computations that generate my state. I suppose it comes down to the ordinality of the infinities involved. TerrenNot zero, only zero in the limit of completing the infinitecomputations.Soat any stage short the infinite completion the probability of"you" isvery small, but non-zero. But we already knew that. Brent --You received this message because you are subscribed to theGoogle 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 GoogleGroups"Everything List" group.To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@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 GoogleGroups "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.

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.