On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 10:13 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 8:56 AM Terren Suydam <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> How do you square the multiverse concept with what Bruno has asserted in >> the past - that the physics experienced by universal numbers is the same >> for all of them? >> >> > When Bruno speaks to a universal physics, he is using a far more > generalized notion of physics (e.g. what is extractable from the laws of > self reference). > > This might yield only a very basic set of constraints on physical laws, > such as: > > - Physical laws should be relatively simple (as simple as possible to > be compatible with the observer's mind tied to that physical environment) > - Physical laws will be mostly computable > - Physical laws will be relatively stable > - Physical laws will yield at best probabilistic predictions (when > considering questions below one's "substitution level") > - Physical laws must permit the construction of Turing machines > - Physical systems will appear to evolve in time > - Physical systems will appear to be continuous and linear > - Information will likely play a fundamental role > - Physical universes should appear to contain a large (perhaps > infinite) number of observers > > Basic principals like these might serve as a universal physics, but in my > view many things might remain open and contingent, such as: > > - The mass of the electron > - Whether or not there are electrons, protons or any of the familiar > particles we know > - The dimensionality of time and space > - Conservation laws > - The speed of light (if there is light) > - What the fundamental "stuff" is (are they Game of Life Cells, > 10-dimensional strings, etc.) > > There are many imaginable ways an observer's mind could be built and could > arise. Each of these imaginable ways is a "physical environment" for > someone, but some of them are going to be much more common than others. > > Jason > A while back I suggested that we could potentially simulate conscious beings in any physics, even far-out ones that bear little resemblance to our own. I don't remember Bruno's exact reply, but it was to this he replied that there is just one physics. I definitely had the impression he was talking about more than just generalized physical principles. Of course, I'm happy to be corrected. Terren -- 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.
