Hi John, <The Cosmic Operating System is not a person or even a super person...>
In Chapter 8 I argued that the cosmic operating system is not less than personal, but more than personal. If the cosmic operating system is super alive, super conscious and super intelligent, then cosmic operating system = God. By the way, I've completed the book draft! In a few days you'll get access to the entire current draft and I look forward to your comments! <...the fact that quantum mechanics says information cannot be destroyed because everything evolves according to the Schrodinger equation in a reversible deterministic way is a little more interesting; of course quantum mechanics could turn out to be wrong about that but I sorta doubt it, so it gives me a little hope. Not a lot but a little.> You have it easier than me! I don't think that everything evolves in a reversible deterministic way (not in the Laplacian sense at least, see chapters on libertarian determinism and Gödel), so building hope is more difficult for me. But I've done it! <I believe that if someday we build a Jupiter brain [-> God]...> What if some alien civilization has already done so? <...so far it's just a theory, or maybe a theory for a theory. > Like everything! <[If technological resurrection needs a perfect copy of a quantum state] you'd become a different person many trillions of times every second...> This contradicts what you just said about deterministic evolution. The quantum state (of you + the environment) evolves deterministically and contains all those changes. But we agree that technological resurrection does not need a perfect copy of a quantum state. On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 4:39 PM John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > > Giulio Prisco wrote on > https://www.turingchurch.com/p/irrational-mechanics-draft-ch-14 > >> >"I’ve been talking of the ultimate God (the cosmic operating system, aka >> >Mind at Large" [...] The cosmic operating system is alive and aware, or >> >better super alive and super aware, and computes above and beyond what we >> >call time. > > > > I like your term "cosmic operating system", but I think it's a mistake to > equate that to the traditional concept of God. The Cosmic Operating System is > not a person or even a super person, it need not be conscious or intelligent > and it might operate the universe but not have created the universe. The > existence of the universe might turn out to be a logical necessity because > "nothingness" is unstable. > > >> > "We need, or at least I need, a concept of life after death that is solid >> > enough to suspend disbelief. Without such a concept of life after death I >> > would fall into the deepest state of paralyzing despair, and jump off the >> > closest window to exit this unpleasant game but God is not enough". > > > > As far as life after death is concerned, the idea of an invisible man in the > sky does not give me any comfort or hope, especially not a God as unpleasant > as the Christian or Muslim God. The existence of God is not necessary or > sufficient for life after death, but the fact that quantum mechanics says > information cannot be destroyed because everything evolves according to the > Schrodinger equation in a reversible deterministic way is a little more > interesting; of course quantum mechanics could turn out to be wrong about > that but I sorta doubt it, so it gives me a little hope. Not a lot but a > little. That's why I'm going to have my brain frozen to liquid nitrogen > temperatures when I die. I want the information that makes me be me be > scrambled as little as possible. I want to make it as easy as I can for your > cosmic operating system. >> >> > "and penultimate God-like cosmic engineers" > > I don't think such cosmic engineers exist in the observable universe… at > least not yet. I believe that if someday we build a Jupiter brain and then > ask it "does God exist?" His reply will be "He does now". >> >> > "I guess there is a high degree of entanglement between persons who love >> > the same people, do the same things, or have similar thoughts and feelings, > > Quantum entanglement is a real thing and there is even a theory that the > geometry of spacetime is the product of the quantum entanglement of > information and there's some sort of correlation between spatial distance and > entanglement, but so far it's just a theory, or maybe a theory for a theory. >> >> > and that entanglement propagates in time. > > Your sort of entanglement and quantum entanglement do have that in common. >> >> > "I don’t think technological resurrection needs a perfect copy of a >> > quantum state." > > I think that is a virtual certainty, otherwise you'd become a different > person many trillions of times every second, every time an air molecule > bumped into you and changed the quantum state of your body. > > > John K Clark > > > > -- > 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/CAJPayv3Z11nzySH6wg4ZE2UX%2BtFpExox0W60%3DG3W%2BwpkEAg3GQ%40mail.gmail.com. -- 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/CAKTCJydZV3-u_j916zKh%2BTOKs7NRScoyeUB5M%3DEFN6j6Dh3YGA%40mail.gmail.com.
