On 7/27/2018 5:26 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


Le sam. 28 juil. 2018 à 00:12, Brent Meeker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :



    On 7/27/2018 1:58 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


    Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 22:48, Brent Meeker <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :



        On 7/27/2018 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


        Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 20:18, Brent Meeker
        <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :



            On 7/26/2018 11:31 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


            Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 00:10, <[email protected]
            <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :



                On Thursday, July 26, 2018 at 9:59:49 PM UTC,
                stathisp wrote:


                    On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 at 2:08 am,
                    <[email protected]> wrote:



                        On Thursday, July 26, 2018 at 11:30:11 AM
                        UTC, [email protected] wrote:



                            On Thursday, July 26, 2018 at 11:24:42
                            AM UTC, Quentin Anciaux wrote:

                                I still don't get it why some
                                people prefer insulting other
                                people and their ideas instead of
                                discussing or just stay with their
                                own thoughts and just say they
                                disagree... What do you gain by
                                saying they are insane, stupid or
                                whatever?

                                It just looks to me childish. So
                                stop doing this, stop writing in
                                70pt size red fonts... It's a
                                disfavor to your arguments.

                                Quentin


                            In fact, I DO think it's a mental
                            illness. AG


                        It's not just wrong, but a gross
                        dysfunction of judgment. Joe the Plumber
                        goes into a lab or his closet, shoots a
                        single electron at a slit, and by so doing
                        creates uncountable universes, all with
                        copies of himself, replete with his
                        memories. Sure. AG


                    You may as well protest on the same basis that
                    the universe can’t be so wastefully large.


                I don't see how that follows. Unfortunately, one
                cannot PROVE that the many worlds allegedly implied
                by the MWI interpretation don't exist, which is why
                I insist the True Believers are judgment impaired.
                Do you really believe that trivial actions by mere
                humans, accidents of evolution, can create entire
                universes? AG.



            No, because that's not what happens, at every
            interactions, universes split/differentiate... Humans
            or not.

            I think that's a misleading way to look at it.  First,
            the vector in Hilbert space representing the state of
            the universe just rotates around. It never "splits". 
            What we refer to as "splitting" is the projection onto a
            plane in the Hilbert space that corresponds to a certain
            "classical" world. Second, this "classical" world plane
            is not sharply defined. Almost all interactions do not
            make any difference to it, i.e. they only make Planck
            sized changes to the action and correspondingly tiny
            tilts to the projective plane.  The myriad atomic
            interactions in your body don't make any classical
            difference.



        Yet if QM is the theory of reality, there is no classical
        world that exists ontologicaly... So makes no difference to
        who, what?

        That the ontology of the world is quantum is a theory.  The
        theory is derived from and supported by evidence which is
        stuff experienced by you and me.  Our experience of the world
        is "classical" (notice I used scare quotes, as I did above). 
        Bohr was right when he observed that science and knowledge
        are only possible in a "classical" world; a world in which
        records exist and observers can agree on them and we do not
        observe macroscopic superpositions.



    If QM is reality, microscopic change are parallel realities even
    if your conscious state is compatible, span over them...Hence
    computationalism.

    *IF* QM is reality...or is it just our best current model of
    reality.  That's part of my point.  Ontologies come from theories,
    which come from epistemology.


Well I've said If... And also, unless you deny any ontology, if QM is true, then these microscopic changes makes parralel realities... Then you have to have a theory of mind which can explain that the same conscious state can supervene on these different micro states.


Don't repeat your if....i've said it, and no epistemology doesn't precede ontology, it does only in our discussion about it, but IF there is something really real, it precedes everything.

Fine, but don't pontificate based on "if".

Brent

--
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.

Reply via email to