On Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 4:55:46 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 Nov 2017, at 22:55, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 9:14:48 PM UTC, [email protected] > wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 8:44:18 PM UTC, [email protected] > wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 5:29:01 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:51 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > If, as you claim, any fundamental parameters can exist, > > > > That > is NOT > > what I claimed > . > I claimed any > f > undamental parameter > that > can exist > does exist, I did NOT claim > any > f > undamental parameter > can exist. There is a HUGE difference! > > > That's much more Tegmarkian than MWI. In the latter, the claim is that > except for the measurement realized, identical universes come into being > where the values not measured in this world, are realized, that is, > measured. So these other universes, if they exist, have the same > fundamental constants as our universe. AG > > > Even if all parameters consistent with logic CAN occur, it doesn't > necessarily mean they DO. I illustrated this possibility, but haven't > proved it (and AFAIK, no one has), with my thought experiment using the > real line. And in the case of the MWI, the parameters of those other worlds > must be IDENTICAL to this world, since the claim of MWI is that those > universes are identical except for the values measured. Now let's go back > to Joe the Plumber. Suppose in this world he leaves the casino after one > pull of the slot machine, having now created 10 million other universes. > Presumably some of those other Joe's continue playing, some not, resulting > in tens of millions of new universes, with identical Joe's, some continuing > to play, and some not. And on and on it goes. Does this really make sense > to you? Joe and slot machines is a parable. Purists can think of Joe in a > lab, shooting an electron at a double slit. AG > > > It seems to me it makes much sense that Bohm or Copenhagen. It is just the > SWE, viewed by machine which evolves doing the coding in some position > base, probably for some reason. > > It is shocking perhaps. But then for a Platonist, if the ultimate reality > is not shocking, it is a symptom you have not yet seen it. It is normal, > our brain are not build to study that ultimate reality, and I think that > somehow, it is even build for hidden some parts of the ultimate reality. >
*Not shocking; rather it shows poor judgment; hubris to think humans can create metastasizing universes by doing simple quantum experiments. It creates and leaves a ton of unanswered questions under the rug and ignored, which never seems to faze its enthusiasts. AG* > > With Mechanism, it becomes conceptually very simple. You need only the > numbers and addition or multiplication (or any first order theory Turing > equivalent to it). That is, you need only a universal machine, in the > mathematical sense of Church, Post, Turing, Kleene, ... Then the existence > of all pieces of dreams is given by very elementary theory, and it involves > the dreamers sometimes sharing very long dreams, and some other > consciousness state. In fact this gives a theology in the greek sense of > the terms, meaning that it contains physics, making Mechanism testable. The > "many-apparent worlds" is a confirmation of the infinitely many dreams > below our substitution levels, and the math of self-reference provides > three quantum logics for the notion of "observable" by a mean Universal > Turing machine". > > Bruno > > > > > > > > > > > then there would be universes where matter could NOT exist, and the > reproducing of the measuring scenario would be IMPOSSIBLE! > > > And that is why the MWI says everything that can happen does happen, not > everything that can't happen does happen. > > > > You need help, badly, urgently. > > > Hmm, after communicating with you for a while I have reached the > following conclusion: > > you sir are an ass. > > John K Clark > > > You shouldn't have deleted what you actually wrote. Then we could judge > what your words conveyed. I don't time now to dredge it up. In any event, > the parable about the slot machine says it all. AG > > > > > > > > > > > ... -- 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.
