On 31 Oct 2013, at 19:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: It is the Indra net of universal numbers reflecting
themselves which exists as consequences of the laws of addition or
multiplication.
Richard: Very Platonic and that is perhaps what programs the
Metaverse number net.
But from my Aristotelian viewpoint, it is the Indra net of universal
numbers that institutes the laws of addition and multiplication.
Physics first.
No problem, Richard. But then UDA shows that our bodies are not
machines. You better have to say "no" to the doctor.
Then, "physics first", or its idealist counterpart "sense or
consciousness first" take what I want to understand for granted.
Also, your own theory seems to take the number for granted. So ...
Bruno
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 30 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Richard: Here are a few quotes from http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/physics/multiverse.php
that indicate that the current discussion of quantum physics,
string physics and cosmology is really all about whether or not
there is a god creator. Atheistic scientists like Hawking prefer
MWI (Many World Interpretation of quantum mechanics) which predicts
a multiverse of overlapping, parallel, unobservable universes. But
many if not most scientists find such a notion anathema even though
it seems to be the only way to make sense out of quantum theory. I
find it interesting that comp seemingly supports the Hindu concept
of maya as well as MWI.
Without MWI, I would have never have believed in comp, nor in
Hinduism perhaps. Hard to say.
Excerpts:
Needless to say, many theologically-minded persons view the
multiverse as a futile and pathetic attempt to avoid the notion
that God is the Designer of the universe. Philosopher-theologian
Neil Manson described the multiverse as "the last resort for the
desperate atheist" [Davies2007, pg. 265].
Yes, but then there is the two slits experiments, and the many-
dreams in arithmetic, is an arithmetical reality (be them weird
zombie-full histories, or conscious one).
Paul Davies: Davies, a leading physicist, notes that the multiverse
represents an inconceivably flagrant violation of Occam's razor --
postulating an enormous ensemble of essentially unobservable
universes, just to explain our own. What's more, if the multiverse
exists, then not only would universes like ours exist, but also
vastly more universes where advanced technological civilizations
acquire the power to simulate universes like ours on computer. Thus
our entire universe, including all "intelligent" residents, are
merely avatars in some computer simulation. In that case, how can
we possibly take the "laws of nature" seriously? [Davies2007, pg.
179-185].
David Gross: As a leading string theorist, he invokes Winston
Churchill in urging fellow researchers to "Never, ever, ever, ever,
ever, ever, ever, ever give up" in seeking a single, compelling
theory that eliminates the need for anthropic/multiverse arguments
[Susskind2005,
pg. 355].
Joseph Polchinski: Polchinski is one of the leading researchers in
string theory, but he sees no alternative to the multiverse-
anthropic view [Susskind2005, pg. 350].
Steven Weinberg: "For what it is worth, I hope that [the multiverse-
anthropic view] is not the case. As a theoretical physicist, I
would like to see us able to make precise predictions, not vague
statements that certain constants have to be in a range that is
more or less favorable to life. I hope that string theory really
will provide a basis for a final theory and that this theory will
turn out to have enough predictive power to be able to prescribe
values for all the constants of nature including the cosmological
constant. We shall see." [Weinberg1993, pg. 229].
Richard: I assumed digital physics (ie., creation from math
computations) in a quantum holographic string universe and
metaverse in the hope to avoid both a creator and a MWI multiverse.
It turned out that the computational machine of the metaverse
(based on string theory) is somewhat like a god that creates a host
of big bang universes containing matter and energy, but is an
entirely natural (or supernatural) phenomenon, assuming of course
that the Metaverse has a nature. But I am at a loss to say what
creates or programs the Metaverse, unless it is turtles all the way
down.
It is the Indra net of universal numbers reflecting themselves which
exists as consequences of the laws of addition or multiplication. If
I can survive with a digital brain, it has to be something like that.
Bruno
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]
> wrote:
A Quora answer to the following question. Nothing new for me here
probably, but It's maybe organized in a more concise way.
Philosophy: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are
you conscious as yourself?
The implication of materialism is that we are in essence wet
robots, without free will, just chemical reactions. But if this is
true and we are conscious, then does it logically follow that all
chemical reactions have "consciousness" to some degree? If the
human mind is just an extremely advanced computer, then at what
point does "consciousness" occur?
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
