On Thursday, May 8, 2014 11:45:32 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: > > > > > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Craig Weinberg > <whats...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thursday, May 8, 2014 9:40:58 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto G. Corona <agoc...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>> >>>> In this -single universe- context, the fine tuning of the physical >>>> constants are miracles by the way, so the hypothesis is true. >>>> >>> >>> I tend to agree. This is why I reject the single universe -- it's an >>> extraordinary claim with no evidences. >>> >> >> Why would the expectation of singularity be any more extra-ordinary than >> the expectation of multiplicity? >> > > Because of the finely tuned physical constants. >
Finely tuned physical constants is consistent with a sense-primitive universe. Physics conforms to experience, so it is only finely tuned relative to an expectation of alternate, sense-independent physics. > > >> Our ordinary experience is that we share many common realities and that >> those realities are very consistent. >> > > I agree. > > >> In a multiverse, I would expect much more interruption of our >> expectations. >> > > Why? > Suppose Everett is right. Is interpretation recovers the classical world > from the many worlds. Why wouldn't that be enough? > Because there would have to be many more worlds which are shades of semi-classical, non-classical, and non-sensical instead. Multiverse to me seems good for only one thing: To rescue our expectations of mechanism and pimordial unconsciousness. Once we admit that view is no less compulsive than anthropomorphism, then there is no reason to impose the machina ex deus of near-infinite multiplicity. > > >> I would not expect that singularity/unity would hold the kind of >> significance that it seems to for us. >> > > Why? > Because in a MWI ontology, all uniqueness would be an irrelevant illusion. > We are made of cells that are self-contained and interact only locally. > Wouldn't that already break our sense of unity? > > >> We care about what is unique vs what is redundant. Why? >> > > Because organisms that are good at pattern recognition are more resilient > that organisms that are not? > Why would pattern recognition be related to uniqueness though? > > >> This assumible hypothesis means, by the multiverse assumption that this >> has already happened somewhere somehow. And very well we may be, here and >> now, the product of it. >> >>> >>> Sure. I am fairly convinced that we already live inside such a >>> simulation. That just means that the structure of the multi-verse is a >>> fractal. Not so surprising, but fun to think about. >>> >> >> I don't think that simulation of any kind is possible without a >> foundation of consciousness to be simulated in the first place. If that's >> true, and the universe is made of 100% genuine awareness, then the >> probability of a 'simulation' becomes trivial. Simulation does not exist, >> it is only an idea that genuine awareness has about the difference between >> direct and indirect awareness. The idea can be true locally, but not >> ultimately. In the absolute sense, nothing can be "simulated". >> > > I think I agree. I see the simulation as just a set of things that can be > experienced. If comp is true, and some Lovecraftian creature in a > non-euclidian reality is running the universal dovetailer where we exist, > it cannot really be said that the Great Old Ones created us. They just > unleashed us, I guess. There's no point in starting a cult to worship them > -- although there could be some entertainment value in that. > Even so, Uberthulhu has the same problem that we do. The explanatory gap is not explained, only miniaturized and hidden behind the alien-ness of disembodied dovetailing. Thanks, Craig > > Cheers > Telmo. > > >> >> Craig >> >> >> >>> >>> Telmo. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2014-05-08 13:36 GMT+02:00 spudboy100 via Everything List < >>>> everyth...@googlegroups.com>: >>>> >>>> What if God is a Boltzmann Brain? He is likely not, but what they >>>>> heck, it's a shot at looking at the issue from another angle. Another >>>>> thought, is thing of the Big Mind (shrug) as doing the multiverse using >>>>> the >>>>> Schrodinger universal wave function, and allow me to use hugh evertt the >>>>> 3rd's interpretation, ok? This is a ultra-gigantic amount of cosmii to >>>>> initiate biology inside of, a thankless task, that would poop anyone out >>>>> (anthropomorphism here) even God. Let's not cling frantically to >>>>> what Aquinas thought about God. Atheist Shmatheist. By the way your >>>>> graphic >>>>> or whatever couldn't appear on this boys email. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: LizR <liz...@gmail.com> >>>>> To: everything-list <everyth...@googlegroups.com> >>>>> Sent: Thu, May 8, 2014 1:09 am >>>>> Subject: God is an atheist! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> As hopefully the above will demonstrate, if I managed to upload the >>>>> picture... >>>>> -- >>>>> 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-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.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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-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.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Alberto. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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-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.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- >> 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-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- 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/d/optout.
