Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Friday, March 27, 2015, LizR <[email protected]On 27 March 2015 at 01:02, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2015-03-26 12:13 GMT+01:00 Bruce Kellett <[email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2015-03-26 8:05 GMT+01:00 Bruce Kellett This comes back to my original question: since all possible programs are run by the dovetailer, how do we ensure that conscious beings see an ordered and predictable world. Only a set of measure zero among all possible programs would give that result. Yes, it seems to me, we should see white noise, but maybe a selection attribute must be in play... like an anthropic argument. Anthropic arguments are not going to work with computationalism because there is no basis on which you can assume underlying deterministic physical laws. It seems to me it works relatively.... consciousness like ours can only experiment worls ordered like ours... even if almost all dreams/worlds produced by mathematics are not like that and do not allow of consciousness like ours, as you can only experience worlds like ours, it's no magic that you do... like with Quantum Immortality, you cannot experience being dead, so no wonder you find yourself alive, even if in almost all worlds you're dead (or not existing at all). But we do not need the degree of order that we observe. We could survive perfectly well with a reasonable number of miracles -- laws that don't quite work always. And there are vastly more possible worlds of that sort than those that are strictly deterministic. The measure problem gets you every time. Possibly, but how do you prove that's more likely to be experienced than regularity? Do miracles require more or less bits to specify than "same old, same old" ? Could the nature of consciousness be such that the most likely continuer of a given observer moment is the one that has the least available difference from the previous one (in some sense - is it possible to do some maths on this? (must dig out TON....again....))It would take a vast amount of coding "by hand" to create a universe filling in details of miracles occurring at multiple arbitrary points, as opposed to an orderly universe with a few laws and initial conditions.
Not necessarily. Just insert a few (pseudo-)random numbers at strategic points! But, on the other hand, the UD runs all possible programs, so what does it matter if a few are a bit complicated. :-)
Bruce -- 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.
