On Sunday, November 18, 2012 4:23:14 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 08:12:51AM -0800, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
> > Can you explain, in the simplest layman terms, why this argument can be 
> > thrown out? The details are over my head, but it seems to me that the 
> > argument is simply that in order to make universes separate, you would 
> need 
> > a whole other information architecture (which would also have to be 
> > information-theoretically multiplied) to create and preserve that 
> > separation. For each universe, you would need multiple universes of 
> > overhead outside of all universes. Or if that is not his argument in the 
> > paper, then consider it mine. Why does MWI not in itself require a 
> second 
> > order MW to propagate and maintain the multiplicity? If it needs no 
> > resources, then why not use the same argument for the single universe? 
> > 
> > Craig 
> There is no external multiplicity - only a single multiverse 

What I am asking is why would the single multiverse be any less dependent 
upon multiplicity to accomplish its infinities of preserved separations 
than a single universe does? If a universe needs a multiverse to justify 
superposition, then why doesn't a multiverse also need a meta-multiverse to 
keep track of all the possible ways of regulating the creation and 
preservation of universes? How is infinite regress avoided?


> (of which 
> there is a range of opinion as to what that is exactly), which has far 
> less complexity than any one of the contained universes. The 
> individual universes, or worlds, multiply within the heads of the 
> observers, and observers with it, so there is a 1-1 relationship 
> between world and observer. 
> There is no issue of preferred basis, as each observer has their own 
> chosen basis. Observers with incompatible bases can never communicate 
> with each other - they simply pass by each other unnoticed. Only 
> observers with compatible bases can share their realities - giving 
> rise to the "illusion" (as it were) of a single external classical 
> reality. 
> Hope that helps. I'd say go and read my book, but I'm not convinced I 
> found the perfect explanation of this in that book either 
> ... :(. Others may have different suggestions. 
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) 
> Principal, High Performance Coders 
> Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpc...@hpcoders.com.au<javascript:> 
> University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to