On Friday, February 21, 2020 at 3:48:56 AM UTC-7, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 21 Feb 2020, at 09:47, Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Friday, February 21, 2020 at 12:46:57 AM UTC-7, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, February 20, 2020 at 2:59:05 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> I think Bruce's position is that quantum processes are inherently random >>> and thus NOT computable. Doesn't this conclusion, if true, totally >>> disconfirm Bruno's theory that the apparent physical universe comes into >>> being by computations of arithmetic pre-existing principles or postulates? >>> AG >>> >> >> >> >> William James thought belief in *determinism* is a form of *religious >> bondage*. >> >> https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/philosophers/james/ >> >> @philipthrift >> > > But true randomness, as the opposite of determinism, could be equated with > UN-intelligibility. AG > > > To postulate it is irrational. OK. But once the randomness admits a simple > explanation, like with the self-duplicating procedure, it becomes > intelligible. Everett saves physics from being un-intelligible, and indeed, > leads to the explanation by arithmetic and its internal meta-arithmetic (à > la Gödel). > > Bruno >
But, as I just pointed out in my previous message, the price paid is way too high to avoid randomness; that is, self-duplication is too silly to be believable. I prefer a possible middle ground; that the universe isn't really stochastic (an inference from QM), but pseudo random. AG -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/cd588b0d-0c0f-4415-87ee-a5d0d0ad0f20%40googlegroups.com.
