On 25 August 2014 16:18, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 08:56:03PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: > > > > I think the idea is that quantum randomness is just > > first-person-indeterminancy relative to the universes of the > > multiverse. The holographic principle would imply that the > > information content of any universe is always finite. If there are > > infinitely many universes (per eternal inflation) then there would > > be infinitely many copies of distinct universe. Or invoking > > Leibniz's identity of indiscernibles there would be finitely many > > distinct universes, but the number of those that are expanding would > > increase without bound. So that would all be consistent with > > "comp". > > > > Why finitely many distinct universes? The number of things of finite > information content will be \aleph_0, not finite. > > You would only get finitely many distinct universes if the information > content is bounded for some reason, but I don't see any theory giving > that - even the Lloyd limit only refers to this universe, not any > others that might be out there. > I imagine you can have universes of any (finite) age, much as you can have an arbitrarily long trace generated by the UD. So there would be no logical upper limit on the information capacity of universes. Perhaps. -- 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/d/optout.
