On 29 Dec 2013, at 02:26, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Stephen,
In a sense that's correct, they are actions and the actions are the
computations, but they aren't physical, at least in the usual sense.
Computations are not physical. I agree. They are arithmetical notion.
But I can't understand what is meant by "actions" are computation, or
"reality" computes, etc.
I have the feeling that you are using the term "computation" in some
non standard sense.
This is closely related to the idea that 'everything is its
information only' which I cover in Part V of my book. We could
equally say that 'everything is its computation only, and the
computation is the thing'.
I have no problem with that, it's a good way to express it.....
I am not sure. Stephen has already defended the idea that a physical
object simulates itself, based on a similar confusion. That does not
make sense if we use the terms computation or emulations (exact
simulations) with their standard definition in math.
The notion of physical computation is worse. It is easy to believe
that it exists, like physical computer and brains exist, but it is a
hell of a difficulty to define them, and even more so if we want
physical computation to be defined without using the mathematical
notion of computation.
Bruno
Edgar
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 8:03:50 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King
wrote:
Dear Edgar,
Have you considered the possibility that the physical actions of
matter and energy in the universe *ARE* the computations? If so,
what problem did you have with this idea?
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net>
wrote:
Brent,
What we need to understand here is that the actual equations of
reality math that compute reality DO produce exact results. They
have to because events actually happen. But the human math equations
of decoherence etc. only produce probabilistic results. This is a
good example of how reality math and human math are different. The
Omnes/Everett interpretations mistakenly apply only to the human
equations which are just descriptions, not actuators. E.g. Everett
assumes that the human quantum equations somehow calculate reality
but they don't, and therefore he falsely assumes an interpretation
of the human math equations has something to do with reality but it
doesn't. Therefore they have nothing to do with actual reality and
in particular MWI doesn't apply to the actual math of reality and
thus doesn't apply to actual reality.
Edgar
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 7:33:20 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 12/28/2013 4:25 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
> Brent,
>
> You are implying there is some difficulty in calculating specific
decoherence results
> yet the people who are performing experiments in decoherence have
no such problem in
> calculating them with no reference at all to either of your
interpretations or choosing
> between them... The math works just fine in our single world and
produces predictable
> results...
But it produces probabilities. And the experiments confirm that the
measured values are
random with the distribution predicted. But each measurement only
produces one of the
probable values. So the question is how do you get from the
probabilities, which is what
QM+decoherence predicts, to actual realized unique values? Omnes
just says what do you
expect QM is a probabilistic theory. Everett says they all happen
every time with
different values and we 'happen' every time as observers with
correlated experiences.
What do you say?
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/1NWmK1IeadI/unsubscribe
.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups
...
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
