On 3/10/2015 9:59 am, smitra wrote:
On 03-10-2015 01:28, Bruce Kellett wrote:
I have always thought this. I am a physicist with a lifelong interest
in astronomy. In particular, the structure of the CMB is a topic of
particular interest. So for any copy in another universe to be "me"
in all detail, that copy must be able to observe exactly the same
structure in the CMB. Now the CMB is the echo of the big bang and is
the furthest object that we can now observe: it defines our "particle
horizon", beyond which no data or interaction is possible. In order
to get this right, the whole universe would have to be the same in
every detail.
You can only have access to a small fraction of the information inside
one Hubble volume.
No, you can have access to it all, but you can only retain a very small
portion of that total.
If your physical state would only be compatible with one unique
physical state for the entire Hubble volume, then we don't have to
bother studying the universe, we can just peer into your body and
brain and be done with it.
An admirable non seqitur! I do not have to contain all the information
in the Hubble volume -- I need only have detailed memory of some aspects
of the CMB for that knowledge to be incompatible with differences in
other details. That small piece of knowledge is sufficient to say that
in orderto reproduce me, you have to reproduce the entire universe, in
all its detail: that knowledge of the CMB is an essential part of what
it is to be me!
The latter part of your statement above is just silly.
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.
