On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 11:59 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Sean Carroll: >> >> So Isaac Newton came up with the rules of classical mechanics in the >> 1600s, but it wasn't until Laplace around the year 1800 that this >> implication of classical mechanics was realized. >> It's a clockwork universe. That the way classical mechanics works is if >> you tell me the state of a system right now at one moment by which in >> classical mechanics you would mean the position and the velocity of every >> part, and you knew the laws of physics and you had arbitrarily large >> computational capacity, >> Laplace said of vast intelligence okay then to that vast intelligence the >> past and future would be as determined and known as the present was because >> that's the clockwork universe is deterministic everything is fixed once you >> know the present moment. >> >> > *> But Laplace was wrong in one very important respect. One can never know > the exact position and momentum of any particle, let alone the entire > universe. There are no perfect measurements! Further, the situation is > further aggravated by the Uncertainty Principle. In sum, using classical > mechanics the future is NOT determined by its present, imprecise > configuration. Not only is Laplace mistaken, but Carroll as well, who > should know better. AG * > Oh for christ sake! That remark is as stupid as your crap about the flying saucer people in New Mexico. Do you really think Sean Carroll, a professor of physics at one of the best universities in the world, doesn't know that?! John K Clark > >> Now quantum mechanics comes along and throws a spanner into the works a >> little bit if you're a many-worlds person Laplace is demon is still >> possible. >> So if you know the wave function of the universe exactly and you have >> infinite calculational capacity you could predict the past and the future >> with perfect accuracy. >> But! what you're predicting is all of the branches of the wavefunction so >> any individual person inside the wavefunction still experiences apparently >> random events. >> >> Right, so *you can't predict what will happen to you even if you can >> predict what will happen to the entire universe*. >> >> >> This is the essence of Step 3 of the UDA. In an experiment involving >> duplication of persons, apparent randomness emerges. There is no actual >> randomness in the complete system, but individual experiences will have the >> characteristic of randomness, in the sense of not being able to make >> definite predictions concerning their experiences. Sean Carroll gets >> this. Max Tegmark gets this. You got it at least once 6 years ago on this >> list when you agreed that a forking computer process containing AIs could >> not predict which process they would end up in. This is enough for you to >> proceed to the next step, which adds only a time delay to one of the >> duplicates. You are almost there. >> >> Jason >> >> > > >> >> Now quantum mechanics comes along and throws a spanner into the works a >> little bit if you're a many-worlds person Laplace is demon is still >> possible. >> So if you know the wave function of the universe exactly and you have >> infinite calculational capacity you could predict the past and the future >> with perfect accuracy. >> But! what you're predicting is all of the branches of the wavefunction so >> any individual person inside the wavefunction still experiences apparently >> random events. >> >> Right, so *you can't predict what will happen to you even if you can >> predict what will happen to the entire universe*. >> >> >> This is the essence of Step 3 of the UDA. In an experiment involving >> duplication of persons, apparent randomness emerges. There is no actual >> randomness in the complete system, but individual experiences will have the >> characteristic of randomness, in the sense of not being able to make >> definite predictions concerning their experiences. Sean Carroll gets >> this. Max Tegmark gets this. You got it at least once 6 years ago on this >> list when you agreed that a forking computer process containing AIs could >> not predict which process they would end up in. This is enough for you to >> proceed to the next step, which adds only a time delay to one of the >> duplicates. You are almost there. >> >> 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/cc154622-2019-42cc-9195-79e3645f9c76%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/cc154622-2019-42cc-9195-79e3645f9c76%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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/CAJPayv1vDY30ipW_zv8RdSCMwQ9WV_%2BL_Hcri-B51Zu6MLNiWQ%40mail.gmail.com.
