On 10 Jan 2014, at 17:57, Terren Suydam wrote:
Bruno,
It seems that the UDA implies that physics is uniquely determined -
but only for a particular point of view.
Yes, but it is a very general one. It is the particular view of any
(universal) machine. It has to be the same for any person capable of
being incarnated/implemented through a finitely describable body
relatively to some universal numbers.
All what you will add, by consciousness differentiation is local,
historical, and geographical.
So I, Terren, experience one and only one physics, because my
consciousness is the selection criteria among the infinity of
computations going through my state.
Consciousness select you in the consistent extension, OK. But the
extensions themselves are provided by the infinitely many competing
universal numbers/computations below you substitution level, and the
constraints of the observation seen from the self (captured by the
intensional variant of G and G*, in the math).
But what about Glak, a being in an alternative physics?
If Glak mind obeys to the laws of Boole, and if Glak as a finite body,
and if he is self-referentially correct, then we share with Glak the
same sigma_1 true sentences, and he figures it out (by Bp & Dt) in the
same way, so we have the same physics. If Glak shows us an electron
heaver than ours, we can conclude that the mass of an electron is not
a necessity, but a contingency, a geographical fact, and there might
be a law given the mass electron relatively to that type of accessible
physics (given that we succeed in talking with Glak).
Glak's consciousness selects a unique/invariant physics for Glak,
OK, but it does it with some stability, and then Everett suggest that
we are multiplied collectively, and so do share most of our histories
locally.
Better to bet that we do have a collective comp first person plural
reality.
but that emergent physical universe Glak experiences is
characterized by laws that are different from what I experience.
It is a different place, but comp suggest it will have the same law,
probably the same constant. But we get three physics, and they can be
quite alternated type of reality. It is like the electron might be
heavier in Heaven apparently :)
I suspect the three physics to be related to possible altered state of
consciousness here. The "soul" ("& p") resides in three hypostases
(S4Grz1, X1, X1*).
Without incompleteness, such comp physics would have collapsed into
classical logic, and physics would have been without law, the
"multiverse would be smooth and and still more multiple, in the high
continua, inconsistent. That does not exist, thanks to inompleteness.
The laws of prediction of events are the same for all creature, but
perhaps with some variants.
Bruno
Terren
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 10 Jan 2014, at 09:58, LizR wrote:
On 10 January 2014 21:54, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
On 09 Jan 2014, at 22:45, LizR wrote:
On 10 January 2014 10:33, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
I think the question is whether comp determines that the world is
(locally) Lorentz invariant. If it is, then c is just a unit
conversion factor between the + and - signature terms. It's value
is arbitrary, like "how many feet in a mile", which is why it is
now an exact number in SI units.
Oh yes, I seem to remember that physicists like to set c (and h?)
to 1.
So does comp predict that any TOE will have a unique solution -
namely the one we experience? So is this an alternative to the WAP
- we experience a universe compatible with our existence because
such a universe has to drop out of the interations of conscious
beings in Platonia?
It is not the same. WAP use a form of ASSA, where comp uses only
RSSA. (Absolute versus Relative self sampling assumptions).
Ah, I don't quite understand that but I feel like a dim light
migvht have appeared.
We might revise step seven, as this should be understood from it.
Any TOE (that is any first order logical specification of any
universal system taken in the ontology) must give rise to the same
physics, at least for each pints of view. It gives the same
theology, more generally, and physics is defined through it.
Remind me, which is step 7?
In steps 0-6, you grasped that from a first person perspective we
are unaware of the reconstitution delays, that they does not change
the probability calculus (if it exists) and that this remains true
for the change between "physical implementation" and "physical
virtual implementation".
In step 7, you are supposed to be in a physical universe containing
a never stopping execution of a UD. So it is like in step six,
except that the indeterminacy domain is infinite. You can realize
then that to predict (in a conceptual and in an exact way) any first
person experience you can have, like when doing a pizza, you need to
apply the "probability calculus" on all your "reconstitutions" in
the UD* (the complete running of the UD). So physics is reduced to
that probability calculus on all your computations. OK?
We can come back on this.
Yes please. This is very interesting!
Thanks. tell me if you (re)saw the step 7 point.
Bruno
--
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 everything-
[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.
--
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.
