> On 19 Jun 2018, at 01:54, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 2:40:20 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 15 Jun 2018, at 12:33, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com > > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > On 15 June 2018 at 02:55, <agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 8:15:59 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com <> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 11:30:27 PM UTC, Jason wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Physical Theories, Eternal Inflation, and Quantum Universe, Yasunori > >>>> Nomura > >>>> > >>>> We conclude that the eternally inflating multiverse and many worlds in > >>>> quantum mechanics are the same. Other important implications include: > >>>> global spacetime > >>>> can be viewed as a derived concept; the multiverse is a transient > >>>> phenomenon during the > >>>> world relaxing into a supersymmetric Minkowski state. We also present a > >>>> theory of “initial > >>>> conditions” for the multiverse. By extrapolating our framework to the > >>>> extreme, we arrive at a > >>>> picture that the entire multiverse is a fluctuation in the stationary, > >>>> fractal “mega-multiverse,” > >>>> in which an infinite sequence of multiverse productions occurs. > >>>> > >>>> "Therefore, we conclude that the multiverse is the same as (or a > >>>> specific > >>>> manifestation > >>>> of ) many worlds in quantum mechanics." > >>>> > >>>> "In eternal inflation, however, one first picks a causal patch; then one > >>>> looks for observers in it.” Our framework does not follow this approach. > >>>> We > >>>> instead pick an observer first, and then construct the relevant > >>>> spacetime > >>>> regions associated with it. > >>>> > >>>> Instead of admitting the existence of the “beginning,” we may require > >>>> that the quantum observer principle is respected for the whole history > >>>> of > >>>> spacetime. In this case, the beginning of our multiverse is a > >>>> fluctuation of > >>>> a larger structure, whose beginning is also a fluctuation of an even > >>>> larger > >>>> structure, and this series goes on forever. This leads to the picture > >>>> that > >>>> our multiverse arises as a fluctuation in a huge, stationary > >>>> “megamultiverse,” which has a fractal structure." > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Raphael Bousso and > >>>> Leonard Susskind > >>>> > >>>> In both the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics and the > >>>> multiverse > >>>> of eternal inflation the world is viewed as an unbounded collection of > >>>> parallel universes. > >>>> A view that has been expressed in the past by both of us is that there > >>>> is > >>>> no need to > >>>> add an additional layer of parallelism to the multiverse in order to > >>>> interpret quantum > >>>> mechanics. To put it succinctly, the many-worlds and the multiverse are > >>>> the same > >>>> thing [1]. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Jason > >>> > >>> > >>> Not right. Not even wrong. AG. > >> > >> > >> Eternal inflation and string theory imply universes created by natural > >> processes. The jury is out on those. OTOH, the MWI has human beings > >> creating > >> universes by going into a lab and doing trivial quantum experiments. Of > >> course they're they same (for idiots). AG > > > > The MWI does not propose that new universes are created specifically > > by certain experiences in the lab. It proposes that this universe > > branching is a fundamental natural mechanism -- that it happens for > > every quantum-level event that we perceive as random from our branch. > > It's an attempt to describe nature by making sense of experimental > > results, the same way as string theory and other theories. > > > > It is perhaps the size of the multiverse implied by MWI that makes it > > hard to believe. It is good to be skeptical of our own "common sense" > > on these topics, because human common sense has been wrong many times > > before in the history of science. Consider the size of the visible > > universe, something that is uncontroversial nowadays, but that would > > sound like complete lunacy not so long ago. > > > My feeling is that here mechanist gives comfort, as there is only 0, 1, 2, 3, > …, or only K, S, KK, … > > A notion of physical world can still make sense, as the least set of > proposition true in all the description of realities consistent with our > (indexical) memories”. But its multiplicity is no more astonishing than the > infinity of universal number relations, or of the prime numbers. > > If QM is correct, and well married with GR, the bubble mutilverse should be > given by an Everett quantum mechanical description of the vacuum, which > itself should be a quantum universal dovetailing extractable from the logic > of the observable of the universal machine. > > What we see is only a tiny part of the physical reality which is itself only > the border of something much bigger, infinitely bigger, and still put under > the rug to avoid admitting our ignorance. > > If you accept Inflation, the universe is many orders of magnitude larger than > what we can observe. How much larger depends on the model of Inflation one > applies. However, AFAIK, there's no persuasive theory that claims its extent > in space or time is INFINITE. I haven't delved deeply into this issue. I tend > to the position that the universe MIGHT be infinite in space and time, but > NOT our local bubble, which I believe is finite. AG
I have no opinion on this, and that is far too complex a question to be handled by Mechanism before long. But with Mechanism, the whole physical reality is still only a projective view from inside arithmetic. “Inside arithmetic” is much bigger than arithmetic. I can’t explain right now: this is related to Löwenheim-Skolem theorem in Model Theory (the branch of logic which study meaning and truth, as opposed to proof theory which studies syntactical relations between sentences independently of the semantics). A metaphor is that the physical reality is the border of the universal mind, which is the mind of the universal machine (in the Turing, Church, Kleene sense). With mechanism, there cannot be any “real” (ontological, primary, primitive …) physical universe. It is a phenomenological consciousness or first person perception emerging from statistics and semlf-reference in arithmetic. Although there are obviously many evidence for a physical reality, there has never been any evidence for a primitive physical reality. That is only a useful metaphysical simplification, but it hides the mind-body problem systematically. It can be shown inconsistent with Digital Mechanism. Bruno > > > The adults have to feel like they have to kill the questioning kid inside > them to … mate and get a job ... > > Bruno > > > > > > > > > Telmo. > > > >> -- > >> 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 everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > >> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com > >> <javascript:>. > >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > >> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > > -- > > 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 everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > > To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com > > <javascript:>. > > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
