On Sunday, August 25, 2019, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 5:50 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019, 3:10 AM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 4:42 PM Jason Resch <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> For example, do you think there is any important difference between a >>>> mathematical structure that is isomorphic to a physical universe and that >>>> physical universe? >>>> >>> >>> Yes; the physical universe is self-sustaining, the mathematical >>> structure is not. >>> >> >> Why do you think this? >> > > Because the physical universe exists, and mathematical structures are > human constructs within this universe. > You are confusing mathematical structures with human descriptions of those structures. If there is evidence to disbelieve that other structures, different in form from our universe, exist, I haven't seen it. > > > >> Assuming both exist, is one capable of building conscious minds while the >>>> other is not? If one cannot, what do you think it is that "physicalness" >>>> adds which is not present in that mathematical structure which enables the >>>> physical one to hold conscious minds? >>>> >>> >>> As I said; the physical structure exists independently, whereas the >>> mathematical structure is only an abstract construct, which does not exist >>> independently of the mind that created it. >>> >> >> What's the difference between abstract and concrete? >> > > Things that exist differ from things that are only imagined. > But how do we know something is only imagined, versus we are imagining something that exists elsewhere? > > >> I think it's only a matter of relative perspective. Other universes to >> us seem abstract. While to people in other universes ours would seem >> abstract. Do you agree? >> > > What other universes? > Hypothetical ones. > > > Other universes, if they exist, are self-contained and do not interact > with our known universe. So speculation along these lines is fruitless, > even if not actually meaningless. > If you think so, why participate in this list? Other universes is the basis for discussion of the everything list. Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 From: Wei Dai <http://www.weidai.com/> Subject: ANNOUNCE: the "everything" mailing list You are invited to join a mailing list for discussion of the idea that all possible universes exist. Some possible topics of discussion might include: - What is the set of all possible universes? - What is a reasonable prior/posterior distribution for the universe that I am in? - Why do we believe that both the past and the future are not completely random, but the future is more random than the past? - Before observing anything about the universe, should we expect it to have (infinitely?) many observers? - How can we/should we predict the future and postdict the past? Jason -- 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/CA%2BBCJUjd1my7fLepXvNROy4gimBx2uFmyYSAr%3DOQa7v-_wXWzA%40mail.gmail.com.
