> On 26 Jun 2019, at 14:22, smitra <[email protected]> wrote: > > Entropy, (ir)reversibility etc. are concepts that only appear in an effective > description where you have integrated out the microscopic dynamics of the > system to obtain effective laws of physics in terms of only macroscopic > quantities. In addition to the macroscopic quantities a few statistical > quantities like entropy, temperature etc. will then appear, they take into > account the statistical effect of the microscopic degrees of freedom. The > description is then valid under the assumption of thermal equilibrium (or > local thermal equilibrium). > > The exact laws of physics do conserve information, so the present state of > the universe will simply continue to exist until eternity. Time evolution > only scrambles the present state, but all the information in it will still be > in there. E.g. 100 years from now, the present moment you are experiencing > right now will exist physically in a sphere with a radius of 100 lightyears. > Now, other observers in that sphere will cause that state to effectively > collapse from their point of view, so your present moment won't in practice > be accessible to them. However, from your point of view (as you exist right > now) this doesn't matter, because they will exist in a superposition > (entangled with the rest of the universe) of all possible measurement > outcomes, which is then simply the time evolved state without collapse which > preserves information. > > This then means that your present moment right now is an eternal, timeless > physical quantity. So, you can just as well take the view that you already > exist in the year 2119 in a scrambled form, distributed over a sphere with a > radius of 100 lightyears and you then subjectively experience the 100 year > old world of 2019 which also exists in a scrambled form.
OK, assuming there is some physical universe. (Which can be seen as a façon de parler here). With digital indexical mechanism, all your past and futures states are supported by the true sigma_1 sentences (aka computations), which is out of the category of time and space. Those categories belongs to the indexical “average” view of the machine/number. If an ontological universe could filtrated the computations in arithmetic, it would mean that some ontological matter is at play in the consciousness phenomenon, and we could no more say “yes” to the doctor in virtue of the digital mechanism hypothesis, we need to add some oracle non recoverable by neither a computation, nor by the first person indeterminacy on all computations. Mechanism is incompatible with both set theoretical based physicalism, but also with Digital Physicalism. We cannot even add the “invisible horse”, because again, we can’t ask the doctors to keep those invisible horse playing their role when asking him/her to duplicate our brains and truncated them digitally. The key point, but well known since Gôdel and Turing, if not Post, is that the notion of computation is purely mathematical, despite being based on some philosophical thesis: the Church-Turing thesis (which is necessary to make mathematical sense of “machine”). Church-Turing’s theses imply quasi-directly incompleteness which imposes the believable, knowable and observable modes of the machines, and the fact that they obey different logics, which “naturally” confusing. Bruno > > Saibal > > On 21-06-2019 18:27, Eva wrote: >> Given that time is irreversible, and global entropy always increase: >> 1. In principle, sooner or later, every living system such as human >> being, or humanity will be annihilated? >> 2. In principle, if system is annihilated then it is irreversible - a >> system with the same internal structure may be created, but it will >> not be the very same system, it may be (at most) perfectly isomorphic, >> but it will not share the same identity? >> So, for example, if I die, and hypothetically, in the distant future, >> an exact copy of my body will be made than it will be an exact copy of >> my body and consciousness, but not my current identity, so my >> consciousness will not reappear after my death like from deep sleep. >> I would like to ask you - in your opinion, my two above conclusions are >> correct? >> I'm sorry for bothering you with this question, I have encountered >> statements that every situation, and every particular life, return >> endlessly because the time is infinite, but the number of possibile >> configurations of atoms is finite. This idea is terrible. I don't want >> repeat my life forever :( >> Some people also talk about "eternal return" in the context of 4D >> block universe theory where every situation is timless. >> P.S. >> I've previously made a similar topic in context of Peter Rowlands >> "Zero-totality" >> works but it did not appeared after sending :( > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/05e6deefebd19a1edc8c79b8d17e31f7%40zonnet.nl. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/862B8D2E-7A8F-40E8-9B35-6D0BE2EA27A1%40ulb.ac.be.
