Dear Dan, you make a lot of sense. Not so surprizing, though: "thought experiments" are created for handling impossible (and NOT knowable) circumstances in the tenets of (possible? believed?) scientific figments. Like e.g. the EPR. Or: teleportation (a decade-long bore for me - sorry, Fellows). My argument is mainly time-less: you can 'teleportate' (funny word) any PAST event, not the FUTURE so the Teleport (noun for the teleportated?) will experience a DIFFERENT lifeline from the continuation of the Original. Your reference to time-travel is appreciable (can I kill my grandmother before she gave birth to my mother?). This seems to be a good pastime-game for people who could do smarter. Regards John Mikes
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:11 AM, freqflyer07281972 < [email protected]> wrote: > Hey all on the list, > > Bruno, I must say, thinking of the UDA. The key assumption is this > teleportation business, and wouldn't it really be quite Ockham's Razorish > to simply conclude from the entire argument that the correct substitution > level is, in principle, not only not knowable, but not achievable, which > means: > > congratulations, you have found a convincing thought experiment proof that > teleportation is impossible in any cases greater than, say, 12 atoms or so > (give me a margin of error of about plus/minus 100) ... this is very > reminiscent of the way that time travel theorists use some of godel's > closed timelike curve (CTC) solutions to einstein's relativity to argue > that time travel to the past is possible. The problem is, the furthest back > you can go is when you made the CTC, and yet in order to make the CTC, the > formal and physical conditions require that you already have to have a time > machine. This, of course, leads to paradox, because in order to travel in > the time machine in the first place, you have to have had a time machine to > use as a kind of mechanism for the whole project. > > In the same way, I think, does your ingenious UDA lead not to the > conclusion you want it to, (i.e. we are eternal numbers contained in the > computation of some infinite computer) but rather the less appealing > conclusion that, perhaps, the teleportation required in your entire thought > experiment is simply impossible, for much of the same reasons as time > travel is impossible. > > It's still an important result, but perhaps not as profound as you think > if we admit that the teleportation required in your thought experiment is > simply not possibly for purely naturalistic (and therefore not > computational, or mechanistic) reasons. > > Looking forward to your response, > > Dan > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/CJQdSUzCiTMJ. > 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. > -- 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.
