On 14 Nov 2017, at 17:47, [email protected] wrote:
On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 9:52:32 PM UTC-7,
[email protected] wrote:
On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 9:38:54 PM UTC-7,
[email protected] wrote:
On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 4:22:08 PM UTC-7, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 1:24 AM, <[email protected]> wrote
> You're conflating Multiverse with the MWI.
You can't have the MWI without the Multiverse, and if there is a
Multiverse then the MWI explains a lot. There are about 10^80
atoms in the observable universe and obviously there is a finite
number of ways 10^80 atoms can be arranged in a sphere with a radius
of 13.8 billion light years; so if the entire universe (not to
be confused with the observable universe) is infinite then at a very
large but still finite distance things must repeat and there is a
universe identical to our own, and at another hyper large distance
there is a universe identical to ours except that the freckle on my
right thumb is on my left thumb instead. And at a even greater
distance one second after a John Clark hits send on a message
identical to this one all the air molecules in the room he is in go
to the other side of the room due to random thermal vibrations and
that John Clark suffocates. Bizarre events like that are not
impossible just very very unlikely, but if the universe is really
infinite then everything that doesn't violate the laws of physics
will happen, and the Many World people say that's what the wave
function is trying to tell us, everything that can happen will happen.
The concept of Multiverse and Many Worlds come from entirely
different contexts and theories, so the idea that they are somehow
connected or related strikes me a patently false. Moreover, the idea
that if the universe is infinite (in some parameter; spatial extent,
age, whatever), then anything that can happen, will happen, is IMO
unproven and almost certainly false. For example, we know that
irrational numbers exist, but in an infinite string of digits
representing some irrational number, there are no repetitions of any
subset strings. But there should be according to your conjecture.
Or look at it this way; if your conjecture were true, it would be
impossible for irrational numbers to exist, since recurring
repetitions of subset strings would be impossible to avoid.
I think my conjecture above is incorrect. Although finite strings of
any length would repeat in an infinite random string, they would not
repeat at regular intervals that would cause the original string to
fail to represent an irrational number. OTOH, I think we can agree
that necessary repetitions of whatever in a FINITE universe cannot
be expected. Thus, if our universe is finite in extent and number of
particles, there will be no automatic or expected repeats of
anything. I submit that our universe is, indeed, finite (observable
and unobservable regions) because it is FINITE IN AGE.
The existence (or not) of irrational numbers is independent of the
existence of a physical universe. Numbers are not physical objects,
unless you postulate a vey special metaphysics making them so. But
then you might describe it, perhaps.
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 [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
