Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:30 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 November 2013 14:04, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: Every science whose conclusions have effects in politics has a high risk of being manipulated. In the URSS and here. From Anthropology to long term Meteorology to everything in the middle. The one that does not realize that is poor fool who does not know how the world works and has replaced with all his innocent stupidity the fairy tales of the past with the fairy tales of supposed sciences. Yes of course. If you read the mails of the East Anglia Climategate scandal, One of the main concern of the Warmists were about to keep in control over the peer reviewing mechanism of the main scientific magazines Long interchanges of mails were devoted to talk about stablishing barriers in the peer reviewed magazines by perverting the PR mechanisms. The fact is that peer reviewing is not a guaranty, on the contraty. It acts as an ideological filter rather than as a quality filter in every discipline in which politics and scientists benefit from mutual cooperation by interchanging money for ideological ammunition. Hi Liz, So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. I don't quite agree with the comparison. I agree with Churchill but I assume that we will find something better than democracy eventually. This has always been the case: in many moments in History people thought that the perfect system was achieved, and then later we look back and it doesn't look so great. In fact, it is possible that better alternatives to our current system have already been found. I like the idea of selecting a government randomly, like it was done in ancient Athens. Interestingly enough, at that time they seemed to be already aware of the pitfalls of populist manipulation of public opinion. The scientific method seems more robust. Science may go through its dark periods, but sanity can always be recovered later. I would say that the imperfection of science stems from the fact that it is carried by humans, and we are flawed. Some obvious things can be fixed: publish or perish is the wrong incentive. It leads to spamming of the literature. The fact that many important articles are behind paywalls is another major problem. One of its most pernicious effects is that it creates a kind of priesthood that has exclusive access to knowledge and can develop its own bias and self-protection mechanisms. This became obvious with the sad Aaron Schwartz incident, and the violence with which the establishment went after a brilliant young guy who just wanted to free knowledge, eventually driving him to suicide. It is perhaps even more serious that we also don't have access to the raw data used in many studies. The Internet is already showing a glimpse of what can be achieved. Many sacred cows have been falling the last few years. Nutrition and sports is a great example: serious doubts are starting to arise regarding ideas that were unquestionable not long ago: that cholesterol is bad, that salt is bad and that stretching before exercise is good. For example. Even that nicotine is bad in itself. Telmo. You might like to consider that hurricanes and bush fires and rising seas and melting glaciers can't be influenced by political opinion, and it would take a huge effort to generate the evidence coming in from all over the world as part of some vast conspiracy. We're forever hearing about the wildest storms, the highest (and lowest) temperatures on record, the greatest floods and droughts and so on. Is it just possible that the overwhelming mountain of evidence indicates, maybe, something is really going on? (And by the way, supposing there is no global warming and we go ahead and develop sustainable power sources for no reason whatsoever before the oil runs out - won't that just be awful?) -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
Hi Telmo There maye have been a hint of sarcasm in my comment, to be honest. I don't think we will better the scientific method, although we may be able to improve how we implement it, as it were - the human part of the equation. But I'm glad I stimulated your interesting comments, anyway! -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/11/2013 5:04 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Every science whose conclusions have effects in politics has a high risk of being manipulated. In the URSS and here. From Anthropology to long term Meteorology to everything in the middle. The one that does not realize that is poor fool who does not know how the world works and has replaced with all his innocent stupidity the fairy tales of the past with the fairy tales of supposed sciences. If you read the mails of the East Anglia Climategate scandal, One of the main concern of the Warmists were about to keep in control over the peer reviewing mechanism of the main scientific magazines Long interchanges of mails were devoted to talk about stablishing barriers in the peer reviewed magazines by perverting the PR mechanisms. Because they had already seen the process being manipulated by the well funded Deniers and their political allies. This is laughable. Not a SINGLE article against human warming was publised in the main scientific magazines and you said that the process was perverted by the deniers? I have no option but to think that you believe en evil deamons with telepathic powers that try to hide your coming apocalypse. And you are right. I´m one of them. This night, by black magic, I will appear in your dreams and I will torment you. Careful whit me. The fact is that peer reviewing is not a guaranty, on the contraty. It acts as an ideological filter rather than as a quality filter in every discipline in which politics and scientists benefit from mutual cooperation by interchanging money for ideological ammunition. Yes, some scientists might be biased - so we should assumed you deniers have the truth on the basis of no evidence except that in the past some scientists have been biased. You have your WW apocalypse, to believe in. But because you will be sooner or later ridiculed by reality, I recommend you to search for a replacement.. What about the end of the ozone layer? no..that has been in fashion time ago but it gains momentum every winter. What about the peak oil? Nah, fracking ended it,although our ecoalarmist comrades are doing whatever they can to stop this menace against our beloved apocalypse. I recommend you to study the chemtrails. They are the true menace. End of transmission from Mars. bip bip Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
2013/11/12 LizR lizj...@gmail.com On 12 November 2013 14:04, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: Every science whose conclusions have effects in politics has a high risk of being manipulated. In the URSS and here. From Anthropology to long term Meteorology to everything in the middle. The one that does not realize that is poor fool who does not know how the world works and has replaced with all his innocent stupidity the fairy tales of the past with the fairy tales of supposed sciences. Yes of course. If you read the mails of the East Anglia Climategate scandal, One of the main concern of the Warmists were about to keep in control over the peer reviewing mechanism of the main scientific magazines Long interchanges of mails were devoted to talk about stablishing barriers in the peer reviewed magazines by perverting the PR mechanisms. The fact is that peer reviewing is not a guaranty, on the contraty. It acts as an ideological filter rather than as a quality filter in every discipline in which politics and scientists benefit from mutual cooperation by interchanging money for ideological ammunition. So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. You might like to consider that hurricanes and bush fires and rising seas and melting glaciers can't be influenced by political opinion, and it would take a huge effort to generate the evidence coming in from all over the world as part of some vast conspiracy. We're forever hearing about the wildest storms, the highest (and lowest) temperatures on record, the greatest floods and droughts and so on. Is it just possible that the overwhelming mountain of evidence indicates, maybe, something is really going on? (And by the way, supposing there is no global warming and we go ahead and develop sustainable power sources for no reason whatsoever before the oil runs out - won't that just be awful?) You better read the mails of the two climategate scandal and conform a better opinion about the matter than with the bush fires and hurricanes that the sanitary towell sellers tell you in your dumb box. You can see how a conspiracy of interests push truth away and replace it with half truths. That is happening since the human learn to talk and socialize. When the whole science is perverted because all the laboratories are a single virtual laboratory, all the model simulations talk together to to adjust their parameters to reach the same conclussions (up to the decimal level) . When the measures of tree growth is made by hungry russians that are ansious to get his money and depend on western scientists that need their next year grant from politicians that want to see reasons for giving them millions of dollars, Then there is nothing that may resemble the scientific method. It is just bare humans doing whathever they can for their primary concerns: their famillies, their personal careers and their ambitions as ever in History. But in some other cases is even more: international crime -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 12 Nov 2013, at 03:38, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 14:14, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 4:29 PM, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen, only being 10 ¹ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰⁰ is likely, it's just non-sense, your life is not random sampled, yesterday happen before today and before tomorrow. That doesn't make today less likely than tomorrow. Sure, but it makes the interval (0,75) less likely than the interval (75, inf). Unless you're Billy Pilgrim from Slaughterhouse 5 this argument doesn't make sense, beause you are forced to sample your days in ascending order. But what does that have to do with the probabilities? A sample is when I ask myself, how probable is it that my age is what it is today. I don't have to do this everyday. In fact I'm very unlikely to have done it before age 4. So I don't see why sequence is determinative. ISTM is only implies that tomorrow will be less likely than today (since I may not ask tomorrow; possibly because I'm dead). Sequence is determinative because that's how the universe works. Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace from day to day, to the last syllable of recorded time. That's the second law doing its thing, and unless you've got very good reason to think otherwise, you shouldn't be surprised that it is. All we're saying is that you should be unsurprised to find yourself living your life in ascending order. You have to pass through your current age at some point, unless you die first, and you should expect to do so before you reach a greater age. If at your current age you ask how probable it is that you are your current age, the answer is 1. If you're quantum immortal then you will have the same probability every time you ask yourself that question into the indefinite future. You are always 100% likely to be your present age! Suppose you're Benjamin Button. For him would it be OK to say it's surprising I'm only 75? I don't know anything about Benjamin Button. Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip off from An Age by Brian Aldiss). Presumably according to QTI he's at the end of an infinite future lifetime, or whatever? But since he's unphysical I guess we can say what we like about him. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? My normal inference is that everyone dies. Apparently the QTI throws doubt on this by pointing out that we have only sampled an infinitesimal proportion of the available branches of the multiverse, and that in another infinitesimal portion there might be people who live forever (somehow). We have strong empirical evidences that we die in the third person point of view. We have ONE theoretical evidence that we die in the first person point of view, which is the empirical evidence for an identity link between mind-state and brain. Both with Comp and with Everett-QM we have lost that unique theoretical evidence, because our best current explanation (comp, or QM) makes that mind-brain identity non sensical. Religion exists because we naturally distinguish the 1p and the 3p, which led to the understanding of the difference between the notion of soul (mental person) and body (flesh and bones). Science will completely come back when scientists will take that difference into account, and the big steps have been made by Galileo, Einstein, Everett and then completed and explained, I think, through the correct understanding of comp (intuitive and formal). For methodological reasons, scientists have put the 1p under the rug for a long time, and some have made this into a metaphysics (something that even Aristotle has not done, although his emphasis on Nature can give that illusion). The 1p comes back under the different art of relativizing the observer's position or status. Bruno What is your inference from the fact that everywhere you've ever travelled has been on or near the surface of a congenial planet supplied with air, water and all the necessities of life? -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:35, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip off from An Age by Brian Aldiss). Presumably according to QTI he's at the end of an infinite future lifetime, or whatever? But since he's unphysical I guess we can say what we like about him. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was by F. Scott Fitzgerald (1922). Oh well, he gets precedence, then. But in any case I don't see any particular relevance, probably that's my fault... So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? My normal inference is that everyone dies. Apparently the QTI throws doubt on this by pointing out that we have only sampled an infinitesimal proportion of the available branches of the multiverse, and that in another infinitesimal portion there might be people who live forever (somehow). But doesn't QTI imply that everybody is immortal, as Jason infers. Did you read Divided by Inifinity yet? Yes it does, but only in infinitesimal slivers of the multiverse, which is what I was trying to say in my roundabout way. If you die in the vast majority of the histories, you will still survive with a probability one in the 1p-view, even if that happens in infinitesimal portion of the computations. The logic G says that all worlds access a cul-de-sac world, but the logic of probability (Bp Dt) abstracts from all cul-de-sac world. If you are not reconstituted in Moscow, in the WM-duplication,, then P(Washington) = 1. What the comp-immortality looks like is hard to evaluate, because we don't know how to evaluate the probabilities when amnesia, and backtracking, are allowed. Comp remains consistent with different beliefs on this, and that will lead to quite different comp religions. Bruno No I skimmed it, but I hope / think I get the point. Is there anything else I should be taking from it apart from this is what quantum immortality might look like, assuming a nearby gamma ray burst and so on ? What is your inference from the fact that everywhere you've ever travelled has been on or near the surface of a congenial planet supplied with air, water and all the necessities of life? That I'm the product of evolution on this planet. Right, you're here in an extremely unlikely situation if you take random samples from the universe. I was trying to draw a parallel here, if I can just remember what it was... -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:36 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Telmo There maye have been a hint of sarcasm in my comment, to be honest. I suspected as much, but wanted to babble anyway :) I don't think we will better the scientific method, although we may be able to improve how we implement it, as it were - the human part of the equation. But I'm glad I stimulated your interesting comments, anyway! -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. Following your analogy. when the the media, and the politicians of majority parties form a coalition to defend their own interests, then you can not have access to the information. You are governed by a collection of liars and simulators. There is no democracy. When the science and their media is dominated by a single coalition united in the mutual interest to increase their budget and they have the communication means of internet to coordinate in this effort, then there is no science. I propose the separation of science and state. 2013/11/12 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com 2013/11/12 LizR lizj...@gmail.com On 12 November 2013 14:04, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: Every science whose conclusions have effects in politics has a high risk of being manipulated. In the URSS and here. From Anthropology to long term Meteorology to everything in the middle. The one that does not realize that is poor fool who does not know how the world works and has replaced with all his innocent stupidity the fairy tales of the past with the fairy tales of supposed sciences. Yes of course. If you read the mails of the East Anglia Climategate scandal, One of the main concern of the Warmists were about to keep in control over the peer reviewing mechanism of the main scientific magazines Long interchanges of mails were devoted to talk about stablishing barriers in the peer reviewed magazines by perverting the PR mechanisms. The fact is that peer reviewing is not a guaranty, on the contraty. It acts as an ideological filter rather than as a quality filter in every discipline in which politics and scientists benefit from mutual cooperation by interchanging money for ideological ammunition. So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. You might like to consider that hurricanes and bush fires and rising seas and melting glaciers can't be influenced by political opinion, and it would take a huge effort to generate the evidence coming in from all over the world as part of some vast conspiracy. We're forever hearing about the wildest storms, the highest (and lowest) temperatures on record, the greatest floods and droughts and so on. Is it just possible that the overwhelming mountain of evidence indicates, maybe, something is really going on? (And by the way, supposing there is no global warming and we go ahead and develop sustainable power sources for no reason whatsoever before the oil runs out - won't that just be awful?) You better read the mails of the two climategate scandal and conform a better opinion about the matter than with the bush fires and hurricanes that the sanitary towell sellers tell you in your dumb box. You can see how a conspiracy of interests push truth away and replace it with half truths. That is happening since the human learn to talk and socialize. When the whole science is perverted because all the laboratories are a single virtual laboratory, all the model simulations talk together to to adjust their parameters to reach the same conclussions (up to the decimal level) . When the measures of tree growth is made by hungry russians that are ansious to get his money and depend on western scientists that need their next year grant from politicians that want to see reasons for giving them millions of dollars, Then there is nothing that may resemble the scientific method. It is just bare humans doing whathever they can for their primary concerns: their famillies, their personal careers and their ambitions as ever in History. But in some other cases is even more: international crime -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- Alberto. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human experience and when you stop having human experience you're dead. Why? If by dying we remember being something different from human, I would still feel like I am surviving. (Amazingly, salvia can lead to such an experience/hallucination). Also, with comp, not everything has experience. Only persons, and they need the support of some computational self-reference ability. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 12 Nov 2013, at 06:23, Chris de Morsella wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com ] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 7:43 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:49, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: A Grand Council of Truth? Certainly not. Honesty is not knowing truth. It is just being able to correct oneself when being shown wrong. It is very simple, if they were not jealousy, vanity, pride, and things like that. Good point… but we are wrapped up in these other emotions and often driven by them, some more than others for sure, but all of us – if we are honest with ourselves -- to some degree on some occasions (no shame no blame) We are so wrapped up in all of this that it drives us to hotly deny that anything of the sort could possibly be so; we cannot even begin admitting to it. Naturally there is a whole range of personality types along the spectrum; perhaps some humans have transcended it all… they say Buddha did, but the rest of us to one degree or another suffer from our own blind failings. It is a struggle within sometimes to not fall into these all too easy to fall into habits and their blind unthinking way of supplying the mind with readymade answers. This very quick, but unthinking mechanism makes sense in a field survival situation, where there is no time for thought to slow down response. Just some cardinal trigger and there is an immediate amplification of the signal in the brain and an immediate zoom to the fore of our minds. Often, especially in situations, such as can develop on internet discussion groups, primitive instincts take over – I have seen it, so have you, so has everyone here. Passion can drive instinctive behavioral modes to the fore. Re-learning the inner being living inside the mind is rather much a lifelong pursuit – for after all we are a moving target, and if we do not keep a certain vigilance we all risk falling into habitual modes of mind. You are right. I think that biological evolution oscillates all the time between the selfishness (the self and his/her passions) and cooperation (long term sensible and reasonable action). This comes from the tension between the 1p and the 3p (Bp p and Bp). It is very complex, and related to the paradox of theology: If everything is solved, we can as well kill ourself. There is no simple solution, and more than one life is not enough. The correct contemplation-level is hard to grasp. But Buddha got it ... allegedly. Bruno And, you already know where I am going with this. One night, while dining at a restaurant, a good one, the High Reasoner, meets with an old friend to discuss the new FIFA rules issued for the World Cup. The friend slides over a closed sports magazine. Have a look at this article in the middle, here. Inside the magazine is a rather thick envelope. -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, Nov 11, 2013 3:06 am Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 01:27, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Ok, but this is a technique for priming the intellectual pump. If it produces nothing good, nothing powerful, then this method would be a complete failure. It seems to me that this works very well, as long as the society is below some level of corruption, in which case you can be misinfoirmed, and by not knowing it and being honest, you spread the lies and this leads to problem soon or later. Problems comes from the liars, but also from the people who have been lied. It is very often hard to delineate them. Bruno -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Nov 10, 2013 2:49 pm Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 09 Nov 2013, at 19:09, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: I am emphasizing having governments print out (Keynes style) absolutely, colossal, amounts of cash, as a reward for coming up with excellent disease treatments and cures, human solar system tours, and clean energy solution, environmental remediation. If the banks won't fund researchers, then private equity will, if private equity won't then a million contributors-open source-will, provided they get a cut of the reward offered by a government prize. I wouldn't be shocked if you, Professor, Marchal, might summon up 25 ECU's in exchange for receiving 3000 ECU's or Golden Yuans, in payment, 5 years later. Only if this reflects some honest contracts. Honesty is not just moral, it is something which elevates a lot the real value of money. It generates trust. Be honest. If you don't try to be honest for the calm of your conscience, do it for the wealth of your children. Today big corporations are based on lies. That's
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
To spudboy: Reason alone does`n move to anything, not even to knowledge. If you think that your passions are bad for looking for the truth, you are wrong. What you must say is that some passions are an obstacle for other higher passions, for example the passion of using the reason to reach the truth. But truth is ever constitutionally instrumental, it is ever passional, because the ultimate arbiter of truth in the most deep of our mind (brain if you like) is a switch that is activated by different stimulus that are unavoidably passional, because that is in our own nature, architecture of the mind, or whathever you may call it, in the light of experience, philosophy or evolutionary science, the ultimate legitimizer of truth is passional. Or in physico-mathematical terms, truth is whathever that maintain us, and ours away from entropic obliteration, 2013/11/12 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 12 Nov 2013, at 06:23, Chris de Morsella wrote: *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [ mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com everything-list@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Bruno Marchal *Sent:* Monday, November 11, 2013 7:43 PM *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:49, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: A Grand Council of Truth? Certainly not. Honesty is not knowing truth. It is just being able to correct oneself when being shown wrong. It is very simple, if they were not jealousy, vanity, pride, and things like that. Good point… but we are wrapped up in these other emotions and often driven by them, some more than others for sure, but all of us – if we are honest with ourselves -- to some degree on some occasions (no shame no blame) We are so wrapped up in all of this that it drives us to hotly deny that anything of the sort could possibly be so; we cannot even begin admitting to it. Naturally there is a whole range of personality types along the spectrum; perhaps some humans have transcended it all… they say Buddha did, but the rest of us to one degree or another suffer from our own blind failings. It is a struggle within sometimes to not fall into these all too easy to fall into habits and their blind unthinking way of supplying the mind with readymade answers. This very quick, but unthinking mechanism makes sense in a field survival situation, where there is no time for thought to slow down response. Just some cardinal trigger and there is an immediate amplification of the signal in the brain and an immediate zoom to the fore of our minds. Often, especially in situations, such as can develop on internet discussion groups, primitive instincts take over – I have seen it, so have you, so has everyone here. Passion can drive instinctive behavioral modes to the fore. Re-learning the inner being living inside the mind is rather much a lifelong pursuit – for after all we are a moving target, and if we do not keep a certain vigilance we all risk falling into habitual modes of mind. You are right. I think that biological evolution oscillates all the time between the selfishness (the self and his/her passions) and cooperation (long term sensible and reasonable action). This comes from the tension between the 1p and the 3p (Bp p and Bp). It is very complex, and related to the paradox of theology: If everything is solved, we can as well kill ourself. There is no simple solution, and more than one life is not enough. The correct contemplation-level is hard to grasp. But Buddha got it ... allegedly. Bruno And, you already know where I am going with this. One night, while dining at a restaurant, a good one, the High Reasoner, meets with an old friend to discuss the new FIFA rules issued for the World Cup. The friend slides over a closed sports magazine. Have a look at this article in the middle, here. Inside the magazine is a rather thick envelope. -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, Nov 11, 2013 3:06 am Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 01:27, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Ok, but this is a technique for priming the intellectual pump. If it produces nothing good, nothing powerful, then this method would be a complete failure. It seems to me that this works very well, as long as the society is below some level of corruption, in which case you can be misinfoirmed, and by not knowing it and being honest, you spread the lies and this leads to problem soon or later. Problems comes from the liars, but also from the people who have been lied. It is very often hard to delineate them. Bruno -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Nov 10, 2013 2:49 pm Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 09 Nov 2013, at 19:09, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: I am emphasizing having
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
Also, I found this related thread on QTI, archived by James Higgo, which took place on this list many years ago: http://higgo.com/qti/rplaga.htm Jason On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
2013/11/12 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 12 Nov 2013, at 11:54, Alberto G. Corona wrote: So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. Following your analogy. when the the media, and the politicians of majority parties form a coalition to defend their own interests, then you can not have access to the information. You are governed by a collection of liars and simulators. There is no democracy. When the science and their media is dominated by a single coalition united in the mutual interest to increase their budget and they have the communication means of internet to coordinate in this effort, then there is no science. I propose the separation of science and state. Yes. And that is what is done normally in a democracy. When science is not separated from politics, you get pseudo-science at the top. In fact you get a religious state. Politicians can consult experts, but have to be careful not taking them too much seriously. Now, about climate, my opinion, since always, is that we have accessed to only one planet, at least for some time, and so we must avoid any irreversible actions *when* possible. Henry Ford in the early 1900 explained already that by using hemp in place of steel and oil to make car, we would allow a sustainable economy, while by using oil, we create a larger and larger imbalance. Given the Hemp alternative, we should not have even begun to use oil, or in a more reasonable proportion, and should have continue with Hemp, as we have done the preceding centuries. Of course the oil barons thought differently, and invented the myth that Hemp (cannabis) is a dangerous plant. A myth which has been debunked since the start. Brent advocates democracy, and I go with him on this. But if their is a climate change, it might be due to the failure of democracy to prevent big corporatist lies. Bruno The planet saver crusade evoke in my mind the country savers of the past that said the same to save their country, and in the process, gain power and rob the people. Save the planet from your preferred dirt paranoia with your own money, Not mine. I have my own dirt to attend. You ignore basic facts of production on biocombustibles and biomaterials. The production of biocombustibles instead of food has been proved that lead to disaster. The obsessed with the idea that there are only a limited X for Y . Sooner or later reach their logical conclussion: some Y must be made redundant. and these Y are people. And the fact is that there are plenty of energy and materials everywhere. The only lacking resource is the inteligence and ingenuity of more people to learn to use them. 2013/11/12 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com 2013/11/12 LizR lizj...@gmail.com On 12 November 2013 14:04, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.comwrote: Every science whose conclusions have effects in politics has a high risk of being manipulated. In the URSS and here. From Anthropology to long term Meteorology to everything in the middle. The one that does not realize that is poor fool who does not know how the world works and has replaced with all his innocent stupidity the fairy tales of the past with the fairy tales of supposed sciences. Yes of course. If you read the mails of the East Anglia Climategate scandal, One of the main concern of the Warmists were about to keep in control over the peer reviewing mechanism of the main scientific magazines Long interchanges of mails were devoted to talk about stablishing barriers in the peer reviewed magazines by perverting the PR mechanisms. The fact is that peer reviewing is not a guaranty, on the contraty. It acts as an ideological filter rather than as a quality filter in every discipline in which politics and scientists benefit from mutual cooperation by interchanging money for ideological ammunition. So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. You might like to consider that hurricanes and bush fires and rising seas and melting glaciers can't be influenced by political opinion, and it would take a huge effort to generate the evidence coming in from all over the world as part of some vast conspiracy. We're forever hearing about the wildest storms, the highest (and lowest) temperatures on record, the greatest floods and droughts and so on. Is it just possible that the overwhelming mountain of evidence indicates, maybe, something is really going on? (And by the way, supposing there is no global warming and we go ahead and develop sustainable power sources for no reason whatsoever before the oil runs out - won't that just be awful?) You better read the mails of the two climategate scandal and conform a better
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
I agree and understand, Alberto, with your elegy. Mitch -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Nov 12, 2013 6:42 am Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World To spudboy: Reason alone does`n move to anything, not even to knowledge. If you think that your passions are bad for looking for the truth, you are wrong. What you must say is that some passions are an obstacle for other higher passions, for example the passion of using the reason to reach the truth. But truth is ever constitutionally instrumental, it is ever passional, because the ultimate arbiter of truth in the most deep of our mind (brain if you like) is a switch that is activated by different stimulus that are unavoidably passional, because that is in our own nature, architecture of the mind, or whathever you may call it, in the light of experience, philosophy or evolutionary science, the ultimate legitimizer of truth is passional. Or in physico-mathematical terms, truth is whathever that maintain us, and ours away from entropic obliteration, 2013/11/12 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 12 Nov 2013, at 06:23, Chris de Morsella wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 7:43 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:49, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: A Grand Council of Truth? Certainly not. Honesty is not knowing truth. It is just being able to correct oneself when being shown wrong. It is very simple, if they were not jealousy, vanity, pride, and things like that. Good point… but we are wrapped up in these other emotions and often driven by them, some more than others for sure, but all of us – if we are honest with ourselves -- to some degree on some occasions (no shame no blame) We are so wrapped up in all of this that it drives us to hotly deny that anything of the sort could possibly be so; we cannot even begin admitting to it. Naturally there is a whole range of personality types along the spectrum; perhaps some humans have transcended it all… they say Buddha did, but the rest of us to one degree or another suffer from our own blind failings. It is a struggle within sometimes to not fall into these all too easy to fall into habits and their blind unthinking way of supplying the mind with readymade answers. This very quick, but unthinking mechanism makes sense in a field survival situation, where there is no time for thought to slow down response. Just some cardinal trigger and there is an immediate amplification of the signal in the brain and an immediate zoom to the fore of our minds. Often, especially in situations, such as can develop on internet discussion groups, primitive instincts take over – I have seen it, so have you, so has everyone here. Passion can drive instinctive behavioral modes to the fore. Re-learning the inner being living inside the mind is rather much a lifelong pursuit – for after all we are a moving target, and if we do not keep a certain vigilance we all risk falling into habitual modes of mind. You are right. I think that biological evolution oscillates all the time between the selfishness (the self and his/her passions) and cooperation (long term sensible and reasonable action). This comes from the tension between the 1p and the 3p (Bp p and Bp). It is very complex, and related to the paradox of theology: If everything is solved, we can as well kill ourself. There is no simple solution, and more than one life is not enough. The correct contemplation-level is hard to grasp. But Buddha got it ... allegedly. Bruno And, you already know where I am going with this. One night, while dining at a restaurant, a good one, the High Reasoner, meets with an old friend to discuss the new FIFA rules issued for the World Cup. The friend slides over a closed sports magazine. Have a look at this article in the middle, here. Inside the magazine is a rather thick envelope. -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, Nov 11, 2013 3:06 am Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 01:27, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Ok, but this is a technique for priming the intellectual pump. If it produces nothing good, nothing powerful, then this method would be a complete failure. It seems to me that this works very well, as long as the society is below some level of corruption, in which case you can be misinfoirmed, and by not knowing it and being honest, you spread the lies and this leads to problem soon or later. Problems comes from the liars, but also from the people who have been lied. It is very often hard to delineate them. Bruno -Original
RE: Our Demon-Haunted World
Climategate a Fox News generated tempest in a teacup. Much ado about stupid human behavior in order to keep the focus off of the salient facts that global mean temperatures have been rising (within the backdrop of natural weather cycles, such as the El Nino oscillation); that global mean sea levels have been rising; that both Antarctica and Greenland have been losing ice mass balance, as established by satellite gravinometric measurements and independently by a European radar study of these ice masses. Glaciers are disappearing at breakneck speed all over the world – Glacier National Park (near where I live will soon have no more glaciers)! Focus instead on the petty sniping emails of some bureaucrats – clearly a much more important angle…. Only in the distorted universe of faux news. There are literally trillions of dollars of future evaluations at stake in this and the fossil carbon barons of the world will do everything in their power to preserve this future evaluation, because their current wealth is tied to what the market place thinks these coal, oil, gas (and oil-like deposits of tar etc.) reserves will be worth. Any serious global shift off of burning carbon fuels in order to mitigate global warming would slash the value of these reserves and hence the current assets of these billionaires. This is far more financial motive than the petty bureaucratic maneuvering faux news has presented as the driving motive to manufacture this scary story of global warming – go to sleep take the blue pill, and above all keep burning coal…. Its just those crazed warmists… or so the often repeated denier meme goes. Besides isn’t climategate getting a little long on the tooth. Can’t you come up with some more recent scandal – some nefarious example of evil warmists inventing this scary movie in order to establish a totalitarian new world order and force everyone into the chains of communism Watch out for those black helicopters they are out to get you. From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alberto G. Corona Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:56 AM To: everything-list Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/11/2013 5:04 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Every science whose conclusions have effects in politics has a high risk of being manipulated. In the URSS and here. From Anthropology to long term Meteorology to everything in the middle. The one that does not realize that is poor fool who does not know how the world works and has replaced with all his innocent stupidity the fairy tales of the past with the fairy tales of supposed sciences. If you read the mails of the East Anglia Climategate scandal, One of the main concern of the Warmists were about to keep in control over the peer reviewing mechanism of the main scientific magazines Long interchanges of mails were devoted to talk about stablishing barriers in the peer reviewed magazines by perverting the PR mechanisms. Because they had already seen the process being manipulated by the well funded Deniers and their political allies. This is laughable. Not a SINGLE article against human warming was publised in the main scientific magazines and you said that the process was perverted by the deniers? I have no option but to think that you believe en evil deamons with telepathic powers that try to hide your coming apocalypse. And you are right. I´m one of them. This night, by black magic, I will appear in your dreams and I will torment you. Careful whit me. The fact is that peer reviewing is not a guaranty, on the contraty. It acts as an ideological filter rather than as a quality filter in every discipline in which politics and scientists benefit from mutual cooperation by interchanging money for ideological ammunition. Yes, some scientists might be biased - so we should assumed you deniers have the truth on the basis of no evidence except that in the past some scientists have been biased. You have your WW apocalypse, to believe in. But because you will be sooner or later ridiculed by reality, I recommend you to search for a replacement.. What about the end of the ozone layer? no..that has been in fashion time ago but it gains momentum every winter. What about the peak oil? Nah, fracking ended it,although our ecoalarmist comrades are doing whatever they can to stop this menace against our beloved apocalypse. I recommend you to study the chemtrails. They are the true menace. End of transmission from Mars. bip bip Brent -- 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 mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 2:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Both with Comp and with Everett-QM we have lost that unique theoretical evidence, because our best current explanation (comp, or QM) makes that mind-brain identity non sensical. I don't see anything about QM that makes mind is what a brain does non-sensical. Quantum immortality relies on it: QM implies material objects exist as states in Hilbert space which evolve unitarily. If mind and brain are not one-to-one, then your duplication thought experiments don't work as arguments. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 2:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:35, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip off from An Age by Brian Aldiss). Presumably according to QTI he's at the end of an infinite future lifetime, or whatever? But since he's unphysical I guess we can say what we like about him. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was by F. Scott Fitzgerald (1922). Oh well, he gets precedence, then. But in any case I don't see any particular relevance, probably that's my fault... So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? My normal inference is that everyone dies. Apparently the QTI throws doubt on this by pointing out that we have only sampled an infinitesimal proportion of the available branches of the multiverse, and that in another infinitesimal portion there might be people who live forever (somehow). But doesn't QTI imply that everybody is immortal, as Jason infers. Did you read Divided by Inifinity yet? Yes it does, but only in infinitesimal slivers of the multiverse, which is what I was trying to say in my roundabout way. If you die in the vast majority of the histories, you will still survive with a probability one in the 1p-view, even if that happens in infinitesimal portion of the computations. That reads like something John Clark would write: if you see Washington the probability you are the guy who sees Washington is 1. No uncertainty there. Sounds like a misuse of the concept of probability to me. The logic G says that all worlds access a cul-de-sac world, but the logic of probability (Bp Dt) abstracts from all cul-de-sac world. What does abstracts from mean? ignore? condition on? Brent If you are not reconstituted in Moscow, in the WM-duplication,, then P(Washington) = 1. What the comp-immortality looks like is hard to evaluate, because we don't know how to evaluate the probabilities when amnesia, and backtracking, are allowed. Comp remains consistent with different beliefs on this, and that will lead to quite different comp religions. Bruno No I skimmed it, but I hope / think I get the point. Is there anything else I should be taking from it apart from this is what quantum immortality might look like, assuming a nearby gamma ray burst and so on ? What is your inference from the fact that everywhere you've ever travelled has been on or near the surface of a congenial planet supplied with air, water and all the necessities of life? That I'm the product of evolution on this planet. Right, you're here in an extremely unlikely situation if you take random samples from the universe. I was trying to draw a parallel here, if I can just remember what it was... -- 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 mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3629/6823 - Release Date: 11/09/13 -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human experience and when you stop having human experience you're dead. Why? If by dying we remember being something different from human, I would still feel like I am surviving. (Amazingly, salvia can lead to such an experience/hallucination). Yes, if you remember. But I don't remember anything earlier than about age 4 and neither do other people I know. Which then implies that we are not past eternal and so it is possible to not be future eternal. Also, with comp, not everything has experience. Only persons, and they need the support of some computational self-reference ability. And brains provide that support. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 11/12/2013 4:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2013, at 11:54, Alberto G. Corona wrote: So what would you suggest as a replacement? The scientific method is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill on democracy, the worst system we have apart from all the others we've tried. Following your analogy. when the the media, and the politicians of majority parties form a coalition to defend their own interests, then you can not have access to the information. You are governed by a collection of liars and simulators. There is no democracy. When the science and their media is dominated by a single coalition united in the mutual interest to increase their budget and they have the communication means of internet to coordinate in this effort, then there is no science. I propose the separation of science and state. Yes. And that is what is done normally in a democracy. When science is not separated from politics, you get pseudo-science at the top. In fact you get a religious state. Politicians can consult experts, but have to be careful not taking them too much seriously. Now, about climate, my opinion, since always, is that we have accessed to only one planet, at least for some time, and so we must avoid any irreversible actions *when* possible. Henry Ford in the early 1900 explained already that by using hemp in place of steel and oil to make car, Only the body panels were of a plastic made from plants, the chassis and engine were steel and iron: The frame, made of tubular steel, had 14 plastic panels attached to it. The car weighed 2000 lbs., 1000 lbs. lighter than a steel car. The exact ingredients of the plastic panels are unknown because no record of the formula exists today. One article claims that they were made from a chemical formula that, among many other ingredients, included soybeans, wheat, hemp, flax and ramie; while the man who was instrumental in creating the car, Lowell E. Overly, claims it was ...soybean fiber in a phenolic resin with formaldehyde used in the impregnation (Davis, 51). we would allow a sustainable economy, while by using oil, we create a larger and larger imbalance. Given the Hemp alternative, we should not have even begun to use oil, or in a more reasonable proportion, and should have continue with Hemp, as we have done the preceding centuries. Of course the oil barons thought differently, and invented the myth that Hemp (cannabis) is a dangerous plant. A myth which has been debunked since the start. Brent advocates democracy, and I go with him on this. But if their is a climate change, it might be due to the failure of democracy to prevent big corporatist lies. Or the propensity of humans to live well today no matter what problems that may entail a generation or two in the future. That's why the fossil fuel industry doesn't have to convince anyone that global warming isn't happening, they just have to create some doubt. And that's easy against scientists because scientists always doubt their own theories. As Albert says, knowledge doesn't produce action. To get large scale cooperative action is a political process. It requires values, passions...like concern for ones grandchildren. If you say science must be separate from politics - how do propose that scientific knowledge about a problem, motivate action? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. And what is this what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? ? Also I don't see the relevance of the fact that we don't have past eternality for that question ? You don't have to move back to 4 to say we forget things, from day to day there are a lot of things I forget Me too, but there are *some things* I remember and even remember remembering. My father had Alzheimers and he came to a state where he didn't remember anything, even minute to minute. Was he still the same person? Didn't seem like it to me. ... that doesn't mean I'm dead today, or that those event didn't exists, or that is necessary they did. QI does not state that we should have an eternal past... only that our 1 POV will never cease (doesn't say anything about perfect memory recall either). No, but if we rely on QM to show we have an eternal future, then we have to say why the time symmetry of QM doesn't imply and eternal past. Of course the obvious answer is in the past our physical structure (i.e. brain etc) didn't exist. But then that also implies that we won't exist in the future as our physical structure dissipates. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. And what is this what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? ? Also I don't see the relevance of the fact that we don't have past eternality for that question ? You don't have to move back to 4 to say we forget things, from day to day there are a lot of things I forget Me too, but there are *some things* I remember and even remember remembering. My father had Alzheimers and he came to a state where he didn't remember anything, even minute to minute. Was he still the same person? Didn't seem like it to me. ... that doesn't mean I'm dead today, or that those event didn't exists, or that is necessary they did. QI does not state that we should have an eternal past... only that our 1 POV will never cease (doesn't say anything about perfect memory recall either). No, but if we rely on QM to show we have an eternal future, then we have to say why the time symmetry of QM doesn't imply and eternal past. Of course the obvious answer is in the past our physical structure (i.e. brain etc) didn't exist. But then that also implies that we won't exist in the future as our physical structure dissipates. Only if MWI is false, QI relies on MWI, with MWI, it is garanteed that some branches will carry a continuum of you from near perfect continuation to no continuation (but these are to be ignore, you're just not where you're not), of course if MWI is false, QI is too. Quentin Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. And what is this what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? ? Also I don't see the relevance of the fact that we don't have past eternality for that question ? You don't have to move back to 4 to say we forget things, from day to day there are a lot of things I forget Me too, but there are *some things* I remember and even remember remembering. My father had Alzheimers and he came to a state where he didn't remember anything, even minute to minute. Was he still the same person? Didn't seem like it to me. ... that doesn't mean I'm dead today, or that those event didn't exists, or that is necessary they did. QI does not state that we should have an eternal past... only that our 1 POV will never cease (doesn't say anything about perfect memory recall either). No, but if we rely on QM to show we have an eternal future, then we have to say why the time symmetry of QM doesn't imply and eternal past. Of course the obvious answer is in the past our physical structure (i.e. brain etc) didn't exist. But then that also implies that we won't exist in the future as our physical structure dissipates. Only if MWI is false, QI relies on MWI, with MWI, it is garanteed that some branches will carry a continuum of you from near perfect continuation to no continuation (but these are to be ignore, you're just not where you're not), of course if MWI is false, QI is too. But when you look at it that way it's not so dependent on QM as on statistical mechanics. If your 'measure' in the world (and I'm not sure that's a coherent concept) is continually decreasing, as the Born weight of dead grows alive falls, then the probability you are dead approaches 1. Then it becomes vague what you means. Can your next experience be that being a corpse, a rock, a bit of methane gas? Is there necessarily a Quentin who remembers being Quentin at all? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. And what is this what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? ? Also I don't see the relevance of the fact that we don't have past eternality for that question ? You don't have to move back to 4 to say we forget things, from day to day there are a lot of things I forget Me too, but there are *some things* I remember and even remember remembering. My father had Alzheimers and he came to a state where he didn't remember anything, even minute to minute. Was he still the same person? Didn't seem like it to me. ... that doesn't mean I'm dead today, or that those event didn't exists, or that is necessary they did. QI does not state that we should have an eternal past... only that our 1 POV will never cease (doesn't say anything about perfect memory recall either). No, but if we rely on QM to show we have an eternal future, then we have to say why the time symmetry of QM doesn't imply and eternal past. Of course the obvious answer is in the past our physical structure (i.e. brain etc) didn't exist. But then that also implies that we won't exist in the future as our physical structure dissipates. Only if MWI is false, QI relies on MWI, with MWI, it is garanteed that some branches will carry a continuum of you from near perfect continuation to no continuation (but these are to be ignore, you're just not where you're not), of course if MWI is false, QI is too. But when you look at it that way it's not so dependent on QM as on statistical mechanics. If your 'measure' in the world (and I'm not sure that's a coherent concept) is continually decreasing, as the Born weight of dead grows alive falls, then the probability you are dead approaches 1. But it will never be 1, so the argument follows. As long as there is at least one continuation, it is enough, and as MWI garanteed such continuation, if MWI is true, QI is too. Then it becomes vague what you means. You is your own feeling of being alive Only you know what you is. Can your next experience be that being a corpse, If it's possible to have a 1 POV that feels like 1 POV while being alive, why not, I don't know, the only thing QI says, is that you will feel a next moment. a rock, a bit of methane gas? Is there necessarily a Quentin who remembers being Quentin at all? There must be one, but there must be a continuum of Quentin in between... The only ignored ones are the ones who don't remember having been Quentin. Quentin Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
You said it: the calentological comunity, acting as a single entity, denied their data. to scientists with different points of view. That is not science. that is a sectarian organization that, because are working with public funding are breaking not only the law and the decency, but the last bit of legitimacy that may made them credible. In doing so, they stopped the scientific inquiry beyond their own circle. You choose to believe what that sect of propagandists are claiming. You have all the right to spend your time and to talk about it. I´m in favour of the freedom of religion. But that is not Science. 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 2:54 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: When the science and their media is dominated by a single coalition united in the mutual interest to increase their budget and they have the communication means of internet to coordinate in this effort, then there is no science. Albert doesn't bother to read the scientific literature. If he did he would see that every idea is repeatedly challenged - but with the aim of resolving questions, not just producing doubt. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. And what is this what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? ? Also I don't see the relevance of the fact that we don't have past eternality for that question ? You don't have to move back to 4 to say we forget things, from day to day there are a lot of things I forget Me too, but there are *some things* I remember and even remember remembering. My father had Alzheimers and he came to a state where he didn't remember anything, even minute to minute. Was he still the same person? Didn't seem like it to me. ... that doesn't mean I'm dead today, or that those event didn't exists, or that is necessary they did. QI does not state that we should have an eternal past... only that our 1 POV will never cease (doesn't say anything about perfect memory recall either). No, but if we rely on QM to show we have an eternal future, then we have to say why the time symmetry of QM doesn't imply and eternal past. Of course the obvious answer is in the past our physical structure (i.e. brain etc) didn't exist. But then that also implies that we won't exist in the future as our physical structure dissipates. Only if MWI is false, QI relies on MWI, with MWI, it is garanteed that some branches will carry a continuum of you from near perfect continuation to no continuation (but these are to be ignore, you're just not where you're not), of course if MWI is false, QI is too. But when you look at it that way it's not so dependent on QM as on statistical mechanics. If your 'measure' in the world (and I'm not sure that's a coherent concept) is continually decreasing, as the Born weight of dead grows alive falls, then the probability you are dead approaches 1. But it will never be 1, so the argument follows. As long as there is at least one continuation, it is enough, and as MWI garanteed such continuation, if MWI is true, QI is too. Then it becomes vague what you means. You is your own feeling of being alive Only you know what you is. Can your next experience be that being a corpse, If it's possible to have a 1 POV that feels like 1 POV while being alive, why not, I don't know, the only thing QI says, is that you will feel a next moment. a rock, a bit of methane gas? Is there necessarily a Quentin who remembers being Quentin at all? There must be one, but there must be a continuum of Quentin in between... The only ignored ones are the ones who don't remember having been Quentin. But that's my point that QI is relying more on statistical mechanics than QM. Essentially you're saying it's *possible* that there will a experiences of remembering being Quentin at any given time in the future (something that would have been true in a Newtonian world view also) and since everything possible happens (another dubious assumption) you are immortal. But having a vanishing probability of being alive, seems to me the same as being dead. Of course you can also argue that it is possible, in some world Quentin is alive, full of memories, has a Nobel prize and is married to Gwenth Paltrow. But isn't that, alas, a completely different Quentin. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 11/12/2013 11:53 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: You said it: the calentological comunity, acting as a single entity, denied their data. to scientists with different points of view. But they didn't. They only discussed it and noted that some of the data didn't belong to them but had been shared with them by other organizations that colllected it. All of their data was, and is, available, as is all the source code of the general circulation models used for predicition. For someone who thinks they know the difference between science and religion, it is interesting that you never make an argument based on science. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
Thus said, because there are eternal laws, there are eternal truths. For the materialists, Konrad Lorenz said something extraordinarily profound that connect two universes of knowledge: The Kantian apriori of knowledge have been inserted in our brain/mind/soul by evolution in the form of intuitions, processing of the senses and other instinctive elements without which not only knowledge but existence would be impossible. They are US in a literal sense. That means that the eternal truths are around us, but primarily also in ourselves, in this instinctive knowledge gained trough evolution, about ourselves, about others and about the world. It includes from the very basic: the perception of space and time, that Roger talk about from time to time, to the commons sense to the the highest truths about what is good and what is bad. 2013/11/12 spudboy...@aol.com I agree and understand, Alberto, with your elegy. Mitch -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Nov 12, 2013 6:42 am Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World To spudboy: Reason alone does`n move to anything, not even to knowledge. If you think that your passions are bad for looking for the truth, you are wrong. What you must say is that some passions are an obstacle for other higher passions, for example the passion of using the reason to reach the truth. But truth is ever constitutionally instrumental, it is ever passional, because the ultimate arbiter of truth in the most deep of our mind (brain if you like) is a switch that is activated by different stimulus that are unavoidably passional, because that is in our own nature, architecture of the mind, or whathever you may call it, in the light of experience, philosophy or evolutionary science, the ultimate legitimizer of truth is passional. Or in physico-mathematical terms, truth is whathever that maintain us, and ours away from entropic obliteration, 2013/11/12 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 12 Nov 2013, at 06:23, Chris de Morsella wrote: *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [ mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.comeverything-list@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Bruno Marchal *Sent:* Monday, November 11, 2013 7:43 PM *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:49, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: A Grand Council of Truth? Certainly not. Honesty is not knowing truth. It is just being able to correct oneself when being shown wrong. It is very simple, if they were not jealousy, vanity, pride, and things like that. Good point… but we are wrapped up in these other emotions and often driven by them, some more than others for sure, but all of us – if we are honest with ourselves -- to some degree on some occasions (no shame no blame) We are so wrapped up in all of this that it drives us to hotly deny that anything of the sort could possibly be so; we cannot even begin admitting to it. Naturally there is a whole range of personality types along the spectrum; perhaps some humans have transcended it all… they say Buddha did, but the rest of us to one degree or another suffer from our own blind failings. It is a struggle within sometimes to not fall into these all too easy to fall into habits and their blind unthinking way of supplying the mind with readymade answers. This very quick, but unthinking mechanism makes sense in a field survival situation, where there is no time for thought to slow down response. Just some cardinal trigger and there is an immediate amplification of the signal in the brain and an immediate zoom to the fore of our minds. Often, especially in situations, such as can develop on internet discussion groups, primitive instincts take over – I have seen it, so have you, so has everyone here. Passion can drive instinctive behavioral modes to the fore. Re-learning the inner being living inside the mind is rather much a lifelong pursuit – for after all we are a moving target, and if we do not keep a certain vigilance we all risk falling into habitual modes of mind. You are right. I think that biological evolution oscillates all the time between the selfishness (the self and his/her passions) and cooperation (long term sensible and reasonable action). This comes from the tension between the 1p and the 3p (Bp p and Bp). It is very complex, and related to the paradox of theology: If everything is solved, we can as well kill ourself. There is no simple solution, and more than one life is not enough. The correct contemplation-level is hard to grasp. But Buddha got it ... allegedly. Bruno And, you already know where I am going with this. One night, while dining at a restaurant, a good one, the High Reasoner, meets with an old friend to discuss the new FIFA rules issued for the World Cup. The friend slides over a closed sports
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? That observation is not relevant the question at hand. MWI implies subjective immortality, not immortality of others. I didn't specify a question. And what is this what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? ? Also I don't see the relevance of the fact that we don't have past eternality for that question ? You don't have to move back to 4 to say we forget things, from day to day there are a lot of things I forget Me too, but there are *some things* I remember and even remember remembering. My father had Alzheimers and he came to a state where he didn't remember anything, even minute to minute. Was he still the same person? Didn't seem like it to me. ... that doesn't mean I'm dead today, or that those event didn't exists, or that is necessary they did. QI does not state that we should have an eternal past... only that our 1 POV will never cease (doesn't say anything about perfect memory recall either). No, but if we rely on QM to show we have an eternal future, then we have to say why the time symmetry of QM doesn't imply and eternal past. Of course the obvious answer is in the past our physical structure (i.e. brain etc) didn't exist. But then that also implies that we won't exist in the future as our physical structure dissipates. Only if MWI is false, QI relies on MWI, with MWI, it is garanteed that some branches will carry a continuum of you from near perfect continuation to no continuation (but these are to be ignore, you're just not where you're not), of course if MWI is false, QI is too. But when you look at it that way it's not so dependent on QM as on statistical mechanics. If your 'measure' in the world (and I'm not sure that's a coherent concept) is continually decreasing, as the Born weight of dead grows alive falls, then the probability you are dead approaches 1. But it will never be 1, so the argument follows. As long as there is at least one continuation, it is enough, and as MWI garanteed such continuation, if MWI is true, QI is too. Then it becomes vague what you means. You is your own feeling of being alive Only you know what you is. Can your next experience be that being a corpse, If it's possible to have a 1 POV that feels like 1 POV while being alive, why not, I don't know, the only thing QI says, is that you will feel a next moment. a rock, a bit of methane gas? Is there necessarily a Quentin who remembers being Quentin at all? There must be one, but there must be a continuum of Quentin in between... The only ignored ones are the ones who don't remember having been Quentin. But that's my point that QI is relying more on statistical mechanics than QM. Essentially you're saying it's *possible* that there will a experiences of remembering being Quentin at any given time in the future That's not what I'm saying, MWI garantee that there will always be a continuation at *each and every* moment, there is always a *next moment*. (something that would have been true in a Newtonian world view also) No. and since everything possible happens That's not the point, at each split, there is always a branch containing a continuation of you. (another dubious assumption) That's not the assumption, the assumption is MWI, at each split there is a continuum of universe, some containing a continuation of you, some don't... With QI, you count only the ones containing a continuation of you, and there is always 1 at each split if MWI is true. you are immortal. But having a vanishing probability of being alive, This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... seems to me the same as being dead. Being dead is having no next state, as MWI garanteed you'll have (at least one) next state, you can't be dead. Of course you can also argue that it is possible, in some world Quentin is alive, full of memories, has a Nobel prize and is married to Gwenth Paltrow. But isn't that, alas, a completely different Quentin. Well it would no be a direct continuation of me now... QI is moment to moment, MWI also predict (without QI) that such a Quentin exists in another branch... but that's not
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
So you say that because the data was finally available against their will, they are good scientists that welcome the challenges and the scientific method? : Their practices tell absolutely the contrary. And the fact that their data leaked out is not in their merit, in the contrary. All what you mention of your past mail above is a self-confession that they are acting as a sect, not as scientists. including their conspirationism the we-against-the-bad-boys-outside, se sylencing of the exceptics inside, the common interest and all the marks of a corrupt collusion as never in history. But this is nothing but a little aspect of all the Global Warming scam. But I will not waste my time with this shit. I will laugh at you and will buy your beach houses that you for sure will shell for a bargain. Or not? 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 11:53 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: You said it: the calentological comunity, acting as a single entity, denied their data. to scientists with different points of view. But they didn't. They only discussed it and noted that some of the data didn't belong to them but had been shared with them by other organizations that colllected it. All of their data was, and is, available, as is all the source code of the general circulation models used for predicition. For someone who thinks they know the difference between science and religion, it is interesting that you never make an argument based on science. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, This is ASSA and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the question. - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and* with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all. Quentin Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 11/12/2013 12:30 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: So you say that because the data was finally available against their will, they are good scientists that welcome the challenges and the scientific method? They were not compelled, they agreed to provide the data after discussing whether there was an ethical way to deny it. : Their practices tell absolutely the contrary. And the fact that their data leaked out is not in their merit, in the contrary. All what you mention of your past mail above is a self-confession that they are acting as a sect, not as scientists. including their conspirationism the we-against-the-bad-boys-outside, se sylencing of the exceptics inside, the common interest and all the marks of a corrupt collusion as never in history. As human beings they were reluctant to provide hard earned data to those who had proved to mere critics - like you - with no interest but to spread doubt. But this is nothing but a little aspect of all the Global Warming scam. But I will not waste my time with this shit. Good that will save my time replying to shit. I will laugh at you and will buy your beach houses that you for sure will shell for a bargain. Or not? My house is 120' above a coastal plain. It will be a beach house if FUD prevails. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, Also if MWI is true, the probability for such is 1... and that can become arbitrarily small Not the probability but the measure. The probability is 1, it is garanteed that there exists a future continuation of me now. ASSA is only about the measure, but even if it come vaninshingly small (and I don't think ASSA makes sense at all), that wouldn't render the one living in a low measure branch (as seen from ASSA) not real (same thing as seen from RSSA, if MWI is true, and you're finding yourself in a branch that had only 1/10¹⁰ probability, it will be as real as now), as all the branches are considered real, measure is not at play here. Quentin , and in fact it is arbitrarily small - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 13 November 2013 05:19, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: And the fact is that there are plenty of energy and materials everywhere. The only lacking resource is the inteligence and ingenuity of more people to learn to use them. That at least you have got right. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, This is ASSA and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the question. I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance. No concern about global warming. - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and* with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely improbable events - Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity? RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all. So have you bought an annuity for your retirement? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 13 November 2013 06:40, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: I knew you didn't live on this planet or care for it's future. Quite clearly - I have my own dirt to attend to ignores the existence of the commons we all share in. If Alberto wants to move to Mars then fine, he is no longer invested in the Earth's environment. But until then he is, and (like the fossil fuel industry) is apparently unwilling to pay the full price of living here. The oil industry wants a free lunch with no comeback from the hidden costs of their wealth-generation (now becoming less and less hidden) - they act as though they have no idea of what economics actually means, as though that they don't realise the price you don't pay now is accumulating somewhere else and has to be paid in the end. (Possibly, if they continue to ignore reality for long enough, with our children's lives.) Also, to claim that the IPCC etc can't be trusted because it's all just scientists looking after themselves while believing that the propaganda from the oil industry ISN'T ... is (to put it kindly) disingenuous. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future,
This is ASSA
and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily
small
If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always
decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be
as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the
question.
I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you
exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance.
No concern about global warming.
That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun in
front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will be
more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe (and
a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where you're
not*).
- so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero.
Right?
I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions
depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm
for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and*
with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled
while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe
But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially
classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely
improbable events
Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is needed
for the argument to follow.
- Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a
whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just
participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really
Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity?
RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all.
So have you bought an annuity for your retirement?
You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life
insurance.
Quentin
Brent
--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
As human beings they were reluctant to provide hard earned data to those who had proved to mere critics - like you - with no interest but to spread doubt. Can ever have been a more clear confession of sectarianism ? Doubt about what? about what yours affirm that is truth and must be taken as face value? Is that the new conception of science and the one that Popper et al teach to me is ourdated? -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, This is ASSA and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the question. I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance. No concern about global warming. That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe (and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where you're not*). But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are there degrees of continuation? If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero? - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and* with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely improbable events Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is needed for the argument to follow. There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a continuation and whether we should care about it. If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as Quentin Anciaux, do they still count? And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond. - Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity? RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all. So have you bought an annuity for your retirement? You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life insurance. Life insurance I understand, it is for other people that survive you (in almost all worlds). But an annuity is for yourself, so that you don't outlive your savings in your retirement. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
Brent, try cruising Wikipedia. I don't know of any biologist or physician, that didn't approve of this nonsense. I am not aware of anyone speaking out authoritatively, as a scientist that opposed eugenics. Maybe you can, but I don't recall anyone on the hero side. Whether is was pro-birth control medical advocates, or public health administrators, I think nobody uttered a peep, anywhere until maybe the 1950's? -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, Nov 11, 2013 3:15 pm Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11/11/2013 10:13 AM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Ah, but Brents' point is that smoking and cancer are proven fact. However, at the time, Troifim Lysenko's views on biology were proven. ?? To nobody outside the Soviet Union - and only to a few there. So were the Eugenicists that lead directly to Dachau. That's like saying Mendel led directly to Dachau - for veryexpansive meanings of directly. Almost 100% concurred (physicians, anthropologists, geneticists, biologists) on this fact. And your source for this is? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability
of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future,
This is ASSA
and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily
small
If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always
decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be
as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the
question.
I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you
exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance.
No concern about global warming.
That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun in
front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will be
more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe (and
a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where you're
not*).
But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How
crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are
there degrees of continuation?
As long as you still feel you, that counts.
If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero?
It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such
continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left
from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest
continuation should have higher probability.
- so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero.
Right?
I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions
depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm
for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and*
with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled
while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe
But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially
classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely
improbable events
Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is
needed for the argument to follow.
There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a
continuation and whether we should care about it.
There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you either
argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true, that's
the way it is.
If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as
Quentin Anciaux, do they still count?
The only thing that count is 1st POV...
And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space
evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than
the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve
from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond.
- Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a
whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just
participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really
Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity?
RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all.
So have you bought an annuity for your retirement?
You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life
insurance.
Life insurance I understand, it is for other people that survive you (in
almost all worlds). But an annuity is for yourself, so that you don't
outlive your savings in your retirement.
So what ?
Quentin
Brent
--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 11/12/2013 1:36 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Brent, try cruising Wikipedia. I don't know of any biologist or physician, that didn't approve of this nonsense. I am not aware of anyone speaking out authoritatively, as a scientist that opposed eugenics. Maybe you can, but I don't recall anyone on the hero side. Whether is was pro-birth control medical advocates, or public health administrators, I think nobody uttered a peep, anywhere until maybe the 1950's? A peep against propagating good genetics or a peep against Dachau. Those are very different things and are only directly linked in a very expansive meaning of directly. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
Indeed. I look at things a bit different, perhaps. then yourself. I see it, us, as being set against obliteration versus existence. Mitch -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Nov 12, 2013 3:12 pm Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World Thus said, because there are eternal laws, there are eternal truths. For the materialists, Konrad Lorenz said something extraordinarily profound that connect two universes of knowledge: The Kantian apriori of knowledge have been inserted in our brain/mind/soul by evolution in the form of intuitions, processing of the senses and other instinctive elements without which not only knowledge but existence would be impossible. They are US in a literal sense. That means that the eternal truths are around us, but primarily also in ourselves, in this instinctive knowledge gained trough evolution, about ourselves, about others and about the world. It includes from the very basic: the perception of space and time, that Roger talk about from time to time, to the commons sense to the the highest truths about what is good and what is bad. 2013/11/12 spudboy...@aol.com I agree and understand, Alberto, with your elegy. Mitch -Original Message- From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Nov 12, 2013 6:42 am Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World To spudboy: Reason alone does`n move to anything, not even to knowledge. If you think that your passions are bad for looking for the truth, you are wrong. What you must say is that some passions are an obstacle for other higher passions, for example the passion of using the reason to reach the truth. But truth is ever constitutionally instrumental, it is ever passional, because the ultimate arbiter of truth in the most deep of our mind (brain if you like) is a switch that is activated by different stimulus that are unavoidably passional, because that is in our own nature, architecture of the mind, or whathever you may call it, in the light of experience, philosophy or evolutionary science, the ultimate legitimizer of truth is passional. Or in physico-mathematical terms, truth is whathever that maintain us, and ours away from entropic obliteration, 2013/11/12 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 12 Nov 2013, at 06:23, Chris de Morsella wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 7:43 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:49, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: A Grand Council of Truth? Certainly not. Honesty is not knowing truth. It is just being able to correct oneself when being shown wrong. It is very simple, if they were not jealousy, vanity, pride, and things like that. Good point… but we are wrapped up in these other emotions and often driven by them, some more than others for sure, but all of us – if we are honest with ourselves -- to some degree on some occasions (no shame no blame) We are so wrapped up in all of this that it drives us to hotly deny that anything of the sort could possibly be so; we cannot even begin admitting to it. Naturally there is a whole range of personality types along the spectrum; perhaps some humans have transcended it all… they say Buddha did, but the rest of us to one degree or another suffer from our own blind failings. It is a struggle within sometimes to not fall into these all too easy to fall into habits and their blind unthinking way of supplying the mind with readymade answers. This very quick, but unthinking mechanism makes sense in a field survival situation, where there is no time for thought to slow down response. Just some cardinal trigger and there is an immediate amplification of the signal in the brain and an immediate zoom to the fore of our minds. Often, especially in situations, such as can develop on internet discussion groups, primitive instincts take over – I have seen it, so have you, so has everyone here. Passion can drive instinctive behavioral modes to the fore. Re-learning the inner being living inside the mind is rather much a lifelong pursuit – for after all we are a moving target, and if we do not keep a certain vigilance we all risk falling into habitual modes of mind. You are right. I think that biological evolution oscillates all the time between the selfishness (the self and his/her passions) and cooperation (long term sensible and reasonable action). This comes from the tension between the 1p and the 3p (Bp p and Bp). It is very complex, and related to the paradox of theology: If everything is solved, we can as well kill ourself. There is no simple solution, and more than one life is not enough. The correct contemplation-level is hard to grasp.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, This is ASSA and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the question. I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance. No concern about global warming. That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe (and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where you're not*). But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are there degrees of continuation? As long as you still feel you, that counts. If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero? It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest continuation should have higher probability. - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and* with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely improbable events Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is needed for the argument to follow. There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a continuation and whether we should care about it. There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you either argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true, that's the way it is. Well I'm certainly not dogmatically assuming MWI. In fact I'm testing whether it leads to absurdities. If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as Quentin Anciaux, do they still count? The only thing that count is 1st POV... So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond. - Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity? RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all. So have you bought an annuity for your retirement? You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life insurance. Life insurance I understand, it is for other people that survive you (in almost all worlds). But an annuity is for yourself, so that you don't outlive your savings in your retirement. So what ? So if you think you will live much longer than the insurance companies think you will, you should buy an annuity for your (very) old age. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
Probably both, if my reading of history books about this time. Which I am using as a reminder that we need to be cautious about how to react to this, AGW might be completely true, but I am worried that world socialists, and a cadre of billionaire supporters want this for other reasons then to save the Earth. Call it paranoia, but many of these want wealth transference from the USA, Australia, Canada and Europe to the 3rd world. The billionaires can accrue power for money, in dealing with these Marxists. And, no its not a great plot, but a commonality of interests, tween governments, parties and billionaires. That's my best guess, but it doesn't exclude our responsibility in trying to save ourselves from AGW. Lastly, if you want us to give up the bad, dirty, power, then please provide a clean, affordable, abundant substitute. Faster, please. -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Nov 12, 2013 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Our Demon-Haunted World On 11/12/2013 1:36 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Brent, trycruising Wikipedia. I don't know of any biologist or physician,that didn't approve of this nonsense. I am not aware of anyonespeaking out authoritatively, as a scientist that opposed eugenics. Maybe you can, but I don't recall anyone on the heroside. Whether is was pro-birth control medical advocates, orpublic health administrators, I think nobody uttered a peep,anywhere until maybe the 1950's? A peep against propagating good genetics or a peep against Dachau. Those are very different things and are only directly linked in a very expansive meaning of directly. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis:
How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis: They said, wait a minute. We didn't cause this problem. The govt and the bankers caused ity. So they threw the bankers and other causers of the debt into jail. Hmmm. Sounds tempting. - Roger Clough http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-BJgwWx57U# Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability
of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future,
This is ASSA
and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily
small
If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always
decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be
as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the
question.
I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you
exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance.
No concern about global warming.
That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun
in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will
be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe
(and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where
you're not*).
But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How
crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are
there degrees of continuation?
As long as you still feel you, that counts.
If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero?
It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such
continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left
from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest
continuation should have higher probability.
- so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero.
Right?
I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions
depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm
for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and*
with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled
while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe
But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially
classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely
improbable events
Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is
needed for the argument to follow.
There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a
continuation and whether we should care about it.
There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you
either argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true,
that's the way it is.
Well I'm certainly not dogmatically assuming MWI. In fact I'm testing
whether it leads to absurdities.
Sure, the point is that if MWI is true, the argument follows.
If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as
Quentin Anciaux, do they still count?
The only thing that count is 1st POV...
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV.
I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for
yourself.
And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space
evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than
the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve
from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond.
- Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a
whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just
participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really
Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity?
RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all.
So have you bought an annuity for your retirement?
You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life
insurance.
Life insurance I understand, it is for other people that survive you (in
almost all worlds). But an annuity is for yourself, so that you don't
outlive your savings in your retirement.
So what ?
So if you think you will live much longer than the insurance companies
think you will, you should buy an annuity for your (very) old age.
Maybe we should.
Brent
--
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 post to this group,
Re: How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis:
Good move. But they are still in debt On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis: They said, wait a minute. We didn't cause this problem. The govt and the bankers caused ity. So they threw the bankers and other causers of the debt into jail. Hmmm. Sounds tempting. - Roger Clough http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-BJgwWx57U# Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability
of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future,
This is ASSA
and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily
small
If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always
decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be
as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the
question.
I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you
exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance.
No concern about global warming.
That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun
in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will
be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe
(and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where
you're not*).
But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How
crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are
there degrees of continuation?
As long as you still feel you, that counts.
If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero?
It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such
continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left
from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest
continuation should have higher probability.
- so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes
zero. Right?
I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions
depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm
for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and*
with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled
while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe
But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially
classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely
improbable events
Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is
needed for the argument to follow.
There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a
continuation and whether we should care about it.
There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you
either argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true,
that's the way it is.
Well I'm certainly not dogmatically assuming MWI. In fact I'm testing
whether it leads to absurdities.
Sure, the point is that if MWI is true, the argument follows.
If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as
Quentin Anciaux, do they still count?
The only thing that count is 1st POV...
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV.
I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for
yourself.
And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space
evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than
the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve
from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond.
- Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a
whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just
participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really
Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity?
RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all.
So have you bought an annuity for your retirement?
You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life
insurance.
Life insurance I understand, it is for other people that survive you
(in almost all worlds). But an annuity is for yourself, so that you don't
outlive your savings in your retirement.
So what ?
So if you think you will live much longer than the insurance companies
think you will, you should buy an annuity for your (very) old age.
Maybe we should.
Brent
--
You received this message because you
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
Liz wrote: (and I try to interject my remarks in plain lettering) *Sequence is determinative because that's how the universe works. * I would say: how WE explain the workings of the universe (- rather Multiverse). * Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace from day to day, to the last syllable of recorded time. * Ditto *That's the second law doing its thing, and unless you've got very good reason to think otherwise, you shouldn't be surprised that it is. * Laws are our deduction of the majority-observed phenomena.They do not regulate Nature: WE think they are Nature's laws. - So far... *All we're saying is that you should be unsurprised to find yourself living your life in ascending order. * Order? as we regulate our views (including those 'laws') *You have to pass through your current age at some point, unless you die first, and you should expect to do so before you reach a greater age. If at your current age you ask how probable it is that you are your current age, the answer is 1. If you're quantum immortal then you will have the same probability every time you ask yourself that question into the indefinite future. You are always 100% likely to be your present age...* Unless you dream... BTW LIKELY is not = Probability 1. The P-word reflects on our PRESENT (very incomplete) views and does not include a sequence (if it is not '1'). Just musing JM On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 9:38 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 November 2013 14:14, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 4:29 PM, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote: On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen, only being 10¹⁰⁰ is likely, it's just non-sense, your life is not random sampled, yesterday happen before today and before tomorrow. That doesn't make today less likely than tomorrow. Sure, but it makes the interval (0,75) less likely than the interval (75, inf). Unless you're Billy Pilgrim from Slaughterhouse 5 this argument doesn't make sense, beause you are forced to sample your days in ascending order. But what does that have to do with the probabilities? A sample is when I ask myself, how probable is it that my age is what it is today. I don't have to do this everyday. In fact I'm very unlikely to have done it before age 4. So I don't see why sequence is determinative. ISTM is only implies that tomorrow will be less likely than today (since I may not ask tomorrow; possibly because I'm dead). Sequence is determinative because that's how the universe works. Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace from day to day, to the last syllable of recorded time. That's the second law doing its thing, and unless you've got very good reason to think otherwise, you shouldn't be surprised that it is. All we're saying is that you should be unsurprised to find yourself living your life in ascending order. You have to pass through your current age at some point, unless you die first, and you should expect to do so before you reach a greater age. If at your current age you ask how probable it is that you are your current age, the answer is 1. If you're quantum immortal then you will have the same probability every time you ask yourself that question into the indefinite future. You are always 100% likely to be your present age! Suppose you're Benjamin Button. For him would it be OK to say it's surprising I'm only 75? I don't know anything about Benjamin Button. Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse. Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip off from An Age by Brian Aldiss). Presumably according to QTI he's at the end of an infinite future lifetime, or whatever? But since he's unphysical I guess we can say what we like about him. So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age 150? My normal inference is that everyone dies. Apparently the QTI throws doubt on this by pointing out that we have only sampled an infinitesimal proportion of the available branches of the multiverse, and that in another infinitesimal portion there might be people who live forever (somehow). What is your inference from the fact that everywhere you've ever travelled has been on or near the surface of a congenial planet supplied with air, water and all the necessities of life? -- 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 post to this group, send email to
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for yourself. Yes, but how do I know it? Is it a matter of perceiving temporal overlap of thoughts - no, because then I woudn't be the same person after anesthesia. Is it a matter of memories - that seems plausible; although I don't seem to need very many memories or access them often to be me. Is it a matter, as comp suggests, of realizing the Brent input-output function in the brain? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for yourself. Yes, but how do I know it? I don't know, I just know I'm conscious here and non and I'm me, I can't explain why, I just know it. Quentin Is it a matter of perceiving temporal overlap of thoughts - no, because then I woudn't be the same person after anesthesia. Is it a matter of memories - that seems plausible; although I don't seem to need very many memories or access them often to be me. Is it a matter, as comp suggests, of realizing the Brent input-output function in the brain? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/13 Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for yourself. Yes, but how do I know it? I don't know, I just know I'm conscious here and non read now not non and I'm me, I can't explain why, I just know it. Quentin Is it a matter of perceiving temporal overlap of thoughts - no, because then I woudn't be the same person after anesthesia. Is it a matter of memories - that seems plausible; although I don't seem to need very many memories or access them often to be me. Is it a matter, as comp suggests, of realizing the Brent input-output function in the brain? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
2013/11/12 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
Well it's cool asserting things... but you should develop more, all I'm
saying is that if MWI is true, the argument follows. It's clear that if you
use other premisses it follows or it doesn't, but without knowing more I
don't know, but as you seems sure, please develop. Plus I'm not arguing
that MWI is true (or that QI is true for that matter), just following the
consequences if MWI is true.
Quentin
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute
probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two
moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future,
This is ASSA
and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily
small
If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is
always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which
will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant
for the question.
I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you
exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance.
No concern about global warming.
That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun
in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will
be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe
(and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where
you're not*).
But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How
crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are
there degrees of continuation?
As long as you still feel you, that counts.
If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero?
It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such
continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left
from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest
continuation should have higher probability.
- so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes
zero. Right?
I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions
depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize
arm
for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true
*and*
with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled
while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe
But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially
classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely
improbable events
Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is
needed for the argument to follow.
There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a
continuation and whether we should care about it.
There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you
either argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true,
that's the way it is.
Well I'm certainly not dogmatically assuming MWI. In fact I'm testing
whether it leads to absurdities.
Sure, the point is that if MWI is true, the argument follows.
If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as
Quentin Anciaux, do they still count?
The only thing that count is 1st POV...
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV.
I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it
for yourself.
And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space
evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than
the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve
from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond.
- Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a
whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just
participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really
Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity?
RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all.
So have you bought an annuity for your retirement?
You confuse things... RSSA is important, and
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 13 November 2013 10:55, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: if you want us to give up the bad, dirty, power, then please provide a clean, affordable, abundant substitute. Faster, please. The Sun, of course. Produces millions of times more power than we need. Trouble is the fossil fuel industry doesn't want us to use it. Given the sort of effort ut into that that has been put into the space race or warfare we'd have this sorted by next week. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis:
Sounds like a good start. Throw them in jail and confiscate their assets. Free the 32 trillion! On 13 November 2013 11:04, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Good move. But they are still in debt On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: How the people of Iceland solved their debt crisis: They said, wait a minute. We didn't cause this problem. The govt and the bankers caused ity. So they threw the bankers and other causers of the debt into jail. Hmmm. Sounds tempting. - Roger Clough http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-BJgwWx57U# Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 10:30, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are there degrees of continuation? If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero? That bothers me too. It hinges on the critical question of whether you can have degrees of consciousness (rather than of awareness). If consciousness is a binary thing then thee are no degrees and you remain conscious in all branches that count as continuations (though horribly wounded in some - which is also a bother). -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality A pretty bold statement. I don't see that the laws of physics require this - there must be a small chance of living to be 200, e.g. if a load of cosmic rays miss your DNA by some miracle? Or something similar. Of course you end up rather frail in 99.% of the branches, so QTI seems to suggest an eternity of being not quite dead. Not a great prospect... -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
Le 12 nov. 2013 22:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit : On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, This is ASSA and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the question. I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance. No concern about global warming. That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe (and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where you're not*). But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are there degrees of continuation? As long as you still feel you, that counts. If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero? It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest continuation should have higher probability. - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and* with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely improbable events Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is needed for the argument to follow. There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a continuation and whether we should care about it. There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you either argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true, that's the way it is. Well I'm certainly not dogmatically assuming MWI. In fact I'm testing whether it leads to absurdities. If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as Quentin Anciaux, do they still count? The only thing that count is 1st POV... So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) It is pronounced like this : An like in the end of restaurant. Ci like sea. Aux like oh. Quentin don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond. - Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns, e.g. you wake up from having dreamed a whole life which led to you being shot, or you discover you are just participating in a simulation in which you were shot, or you're not really Quentin Anciaux, or... Did you read Divided by Infinity? RSSA is of use, ASSA not much at all. So have you bought an annuity for your retirement? You confuse things... RSSA is important, and that's why you buy a life insurance. Life insurance I understand, it is for other people that survive you (in almost all worlds). But an annuity is for yourself, so that you don't outlive your savings in your retirement. So what ? So if you think you will live much longer than the insurance companies think you will, you should buy an annuity for your (very) old age. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 11:16, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Liz wrote: (and I try to interject my remarks in plain lettering) *Sequence is determinative because that's how the universe works. * I would say: how WE explain the workings of the universe (- rather Multiverse). Yes of course but so far the second law of thermodynamics has held up pretty well. * Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace from day to day, to the last syllable of recorded time. * Ditto *That's the second law doing its thing, and unless you've got very good reason to think otherwise, you shouldn't be surprised that it is. * Laws are our deduction of the majority-observed phenomena.They do not regulate Nature: WE think they are Nature's laws. - So far... Yes of course. But we have to agree to some things in order to have a meaningful discussion. Saying we may be wrong about the laws of physics is not a good enough answer to my objections to Brent's use of Bayesian arguments concerning his chance of finding himself at a particular age. Could you address the point at issue rather than using the mystical gambit ? *All we're saying is that you should be unsurprised to find yourself living your life in ascending order. * Order? as we regulate our views (including those 'laws') What? *You have to pass through your current age at some point, unless you die first, and you should expect to do so before you reach a greater age. If at your current age you ask how probable it is that you are your current age, the answer is 1. If you're quantum immortal then you will have the same probability every time you ask yourself that question into the indefinite future. You are always 100% likely to be your present age...* Unless you dream... BTW LIKELY is not = Probability 1. The P-word reflects on our PRESENT (very incomplete) views and does not include a sequence (if it is not '1'). What?? -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 11:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for yourself. Yes, but how do I know it? Is it a matter of perceiving temporal overlap of thoughts - no, because then I woudn't be the same person after anesthesia. Is it a matter of memories - that seems plausible; although I don't seem to need very many memories or access them often to be me. Is it a matter, as comp suggests, of realizing the Brent input-output function in the brain? You don't know if your memories are accurate or that you are the same person as you were a second before, or anything else to do with the *contents* of your consciousness. What you do know is that you're having your present experiences and thinking your present thoughts. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:15 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 2:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Both with Comp and with Everett-QM we have lost that unique theoretical evidence, because our best current explanation (comp, or QM) makes that mind-brain identity non sensical. I don't see anything about QM that makes mind is what a brain does non-sensical. Quantum immortality relies on it: QM implies material objects exist as states in Hilbert space which evolve unitarily. If mind and brain are not one-to-one, then your duplication thought experiments don't work as arguments. I think Bruno may be criticizing the mind-brain identity (a.k.a type-physicalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_physicalism ) which holds there is a one-to-one mapping, where the more modern theories of mind (functionalism, computationalism, etc.) subscribe to multiple realizeability, which implies it is not a one-to-one identity, but rather a a many-to-one (many_physical_states-to-one_mind_state) theory ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_physicalism#Criticism_and_replies ). 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 11/12/2013 3:49 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 10:55, spudboy...@aol.com mailto:spudboy...@aol.com wrote: if you want us to give up the bad, dirty, power, then please provide a clean, affordable, abundant substitute. Faster, please. The Sun, of course. Produces millions of times more power than we need. Trouble is the fossil fuel industry doesn't want us to use it. Given the sort of effort ut into that that has been put into the space race or warfare we'd have this sorted by next week. Look at David MacKay's book Without Hot Air, which is free online, to see an estimate of the scope of the effort required. It's a lot, but as you say it's no more than some other big efforts. The problem is that first we need to start. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human experience and when you stop having human experience you're dead. Why? If by dying we remember being something different from human, I would still feel like I am surviving. (Amazingly, salvia can lead to such an experience/hallucination). Yes, if you remember. But I don't remember anything earlier than about age 4 and neither do other people I know. Which then implies that we are not past eternal and so it is possible to not be future eternal. You may be jumping to conclusions. All that implies is that you don't currently have access to infinite memories. Having infinite memories, and having access to infinite memories, are quite different from having an eternal past. Jason Also, with comp, not everything has experience. Only persons, and they need the support of some computational self-reference ability. And brains provide that support. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
2013/11/13 LizR lizj...@gmail.com On 13 November 2013 10:55, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: if you want us to give up the bad, dirty, power, then please provide a clean, affordable, abundant substitute. Faster, please. The Sun, of course. Produces millions of times more power than we need. Trouble is the fossil fuel industry doesn't want us to use it. Given the sort of effort ut into that that has been put into the space race or warfare we'd have this sorted by next week. And the hunger of the world in a week-end. Brownies for desert -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Alberto. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality I guess that settles it. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 4:13 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 11:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for yourself. Yes, but how do I know it? Is it a matter of perceiving temporal overlap of thoughts - no, because then I woudn't be the same person after anesthesia. Is it a matter of memories - that seems plausible; although I don't seem to need very many memories or access them often to be me. Is it a matter, as comp suggests, of realizing the Brent input-output function in the brain? You don't know if your memories are accurate or that you are the same person as you were a second before, or anything else to do with the /contents/ of your consciousness. What you do know is that you're having your present experiences and thinking your present thoughts. But I think that fuzzes up the idea of continuation. If consciousness is a set of disconnected observer moments then continuation can only refer to some inherent similarities that suffices to order these moments. I don't think conscious thoughts, which last maybe 100msec, have sufficient content to do this. On the other hand, because of their duration, I think they overlap preceding and succeeding thoughts. The brain, as a neural net, can have thoughts in various stages of becoming conscious or producing actions. But that model implies that the continuity is due to physical processes which are not conscious (or in Bruno's model they are at the much lower level). But that implies not all brain processes entail some consciousness. MWI implies continuity at the physics level, but not at the consciousness level. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality A pretty bold statement. I don't see that the laws of physics require this - there must be a small chance of living to be 200, e.g. if a load of cosmic rays miss your DNA by some miracle? Or something similar. Of course you end up rather frail in 99.% of the branches, so QTI seems to suggest an eternity of being not quite dead. Not a great prospect... Eventually the probability of the simulation hypothesis ( http://www.simulation-argument.com/faq.html ) takes over. The simulation hypothesis (that you exist in a simulation) essentially is already 100% if you believe in MWI. The question is what proportion of your explanations are simulations. Say it is 1%. Then when the probability of your organic survival drops ever lower in the many worlds, then your survival through the simulation hypothesis becomes increasingly likely. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 4:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human experience and when you stop having human experience you're dead. Why? If by dying we remember being something different from human, I would still feel like I am surviving. (Amazingly, salvia can lead to such an experience/hallucination). Yes, if you remember. But I don't remember anything earlier than about age 4 and neither do other people I know. Which then implies that we are not past eternal and so it is possible to not be future eternal. You may be jumping to conclusions. All that implies is that you don't currently have access to infinite memories. Having infinite memories, and having access to infinite memories, are quite different from having an eternal past. Of course I don't even have access to memories of last Nov 12. It's not the absence of memories of 1000yrs ago, it's absence of *all* memory before 1944. Is it your theory that there is a first Brent experience, which was not the continuation of any prior experience, an experiencless predecessor. I could buy that, since I've been unconscious a few times. But then that seems to allow there are experiences with no continuation in the sense of continuity. They are just connected by memories or other similarities. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 5:14 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com mailto:yann...@gmail.com wrote: Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality A pretty bold statement. I don't see that the laws of physics require this - there must be a small chance of living to be 200, e.g. if a load of cosmic rays miss your DNA by some miracle? Or something similar. Of course you end up rather frail in 99.% of the branches, so QTI seems to suggest an eternity of being not quite dead. Not a great prospect... Eventually the probability of the simulation hypothesis ( http://www.simulation-argument.com/faq.html ) takes over. The simulation hypothesis (that you exist in a simulation) essentially is already 100% if you believe in MWI. The question is what proportion of your explanations are simulations. Say it is 1%. Then when the probability of your organic survival drops ever lower in the many worlds, then your survival through the simulation hypothesis becomes increasingly likely. ?? What's the difference between the simulation and 'another world' (or this world for that matter)? Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:18 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 4:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human experience and when you stop having human experience you're dead. Why? If by dying we remember being something different from human, I would still feel like I am surviving. (Amazingly, salvia can lead to such an experience/hallucination). Yes, if you remember. But I don't remember anything earlier than about age 4 and neither do other people I know. Which then implies that we are not past eternal and so it is possible to not be future eternal. You may be jumping to conclusions. All that implies is that you don't currently have access to infinite memories. Having infinite memories, and having access to infinite memories, are quite different from having an eternal past. Of course I don't even have access to memories of last Nov 12. It's not the absence of memories of 1000yrs ago, it's absence of *all* memory before 1944. Sure, but there may be other explanations for that: 1. Tunneling through a diminished state of conscious, as someone falling asleep or dying into Brent Meeker the fetus, or Brent Meeker waking up this morning. 2. Engaging in an ancestor simulation as a member of an advanced technological race (future humans or aliens) to experience life as a human. 3. A God-like mind who has decided to temporarily forget what it is like to be God. Is it your theory that there is a first Brent experience, which was not the continuation of any prior experience, an experiencless predecessor. All experience may be cyclical in the very long run, going through every state of consciousness eventually. I think this may be implied if there is always some initial conscious state from which all conscious states emerge (and perhaps all eventually return). I could buy that, since I've been unconscious a few times. But then that seems to allow there are experiences with no continuation in the sense of continuity. They are just connected by memories or other similarities. There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from anesthesia. Would you say the same true for an amnesiac being anesthetized? 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:20 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 5:14 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality A pretty bold statement. I don't see that the laws of physics require this - there must be a small chance of living to be 200, e.g. if a load of cosmic rays miss your DNA by some miracle? Or something similar. Of course you end up rather frail in 99.% of the branches, so QTI seems to suggest an eternity of being not quite dead. Not a great prospect... Eventually the probability of the simulation hypothesis ( http://www.simulation-argument.com/faq.html ) takes over. The simulation hypothesis (that you exist in a simulation) essentially is already 100% if you believe in MWI. The question is what proportion of your explanations are simulations. Say it is 1%. Then when the probability of your organic survival drops ever lower in the many worlds, then your survival through the simulation hypothesis becomes increasingly likely. ?? What's the difference between the simulation and 'another world' (or this world for that matter)? The difference is the world that is simulating ours has access to information about ours, and we/our memories may continue there (in that other universe). Therefore, we can survive even the heat death of this universe. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 5:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from anesthesia. Did you leave out a no? There is a continuation, but not of consciousness. Would you say the same true for an amnesiac being anesthetized? I think so. An amnesiac is just someone who can't remember some significant block of time that almost anyone else would. Last January while vacationing in Hawaii my daughter went down the beach and took a class in surfing. According to the instructor she did fine and nothing strange happened. She came back to the hotel, went in and took a shower. When she came out of the shower she realized that she could not remember *anything* about that day. She also had short term memory problems, e.g. she would repeat something she had just said a minute before. We took her to the hospital; they couldn't find any cause and finally just said, Well that happens sometimes to people and nobody knows why. Over the next day her short term memory became normal - but she still doesn't remember that day. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 14:09, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.comwrote: Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality I guess that settles it. Phew, glad we got that sorted out! -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/11/12 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in less than 150 years. There is no quantum immortality Well it's cool asserting things... but you should develop more, all I'm saying is that if MWI is true, the argument follows. It's clear that if you use other premisses it follows or it doesn't, but without knowing more I don't know, but as you seems sure, please develop. Plus I'm not arguing that MWI is true (or that QI is true for that matter), just following the consequences if MWI is true. Quentin On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments... But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, This is ASSA and that can become arbitrarily small, and in fact it is arbitrarily small If absolute measure makes sense, then your absolute measure is always decreasing, still in MWI, as there is always a next moment (which will be as *real* as the previous one), I don't see how ASSA is relevant for the question. I guess it depends on how you value future states. If only those you exist in matter then you can ignore the ASSA. No need for life insurance. No concern about global warming. That does not follow... RSSA is moment to moment... If you have a gun in front of you and you shoot in your head and if MWI is true, there will be more branches where you are crippled than where you are perfectly safe (and a hell of a lot more where you're dead, but *we don't count where you're not*). But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are there degrees of continuation? As long as you still feel you, that counts. If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to zero? It is, reread my previous message, there is a continuum of such continuations. The one that don't count are the one where nothing is left from you. I would say also, there is a continuum but by RSSA, nearest continuation should have higher probability. - so all rational decisions will be based on assuming it becomes zero. Right? I don't see how decisions come into play here, rational decisions depends on the one taking them... I would rationally choose to minimize arm for me (so as not to put my life in jeopardy), because if MWI is true *and* with RSSA, me in front on a shotgun, will likely result me being crippled while not dead with a hell lot more probability than being perfectly safe But most such events, like being shot with a shotgun, are essentially classical which implies that your continuations depend on extremely improbable events Sure, but the point is *ẗhere is a continuation*; that's all what is needed for the argument to follow. There is a continuation seems to slough over what counts as a continuation and whether we should care about it. There is a continuum of continuations, the point is there is, so you either argue MWI is false, but your argument is pointeless if MWI is true, that's the way it is. Well I'm certainly not dogmatically assuming MWI. In fact I'm testing whether it leads to absurdities. Sure, the point is that if MWI is true, the argument follows. If the only continuations are quite different from what you think of as Quentin Anciaux, do they still count? The only thing that count is 1st POV... So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p POV. I know what is my own, don't know for you, but I assume you do know it for yourself. And I don't think you can just rely on the continuity of Hilbert space evolution because the time scale of that evolution can be much faster than the sequences of conscious thought. So as far QM goes you could evolve from Quentin Anciaux to Neo (or to Brent Meeker) in a millisecond. - Rumsfeld's unknown
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
On 12 November 2013 22:56, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: This is laughable. Not a SINGLE article against human warming was publised in the main scientific magazines and you said that the process was perverted by the deniers? I have no option but to think that you believe en evil deamons with telepathic powers that try to hide your coming apocalypse. And you are right. I´m one of them. This night, by black magic, I will appear in your dreams and I will torment you. Careful whit me. Or you could look at TV advertising, with big expensive ads for cars, or at the paper with pull out sections which are trying to sell cars, or you could look at the TV news, which despite reporting virtually a new climate related disaster every week now, hardly ever mentions that it might be linked to global warming (unless it's to point out that no single storn can be directly linked to global warming - the only mention I've heard recently). Now add up how many people read science magazines and how many watch car adverts on TV. Now maybe you can see who is in charge of shaping our opinions. When car ads are banned, as cigarette ads are, there may be some tiny amount of truth in what you say. (Although by the time *that* happens, Auckland will probably be underwater.) But until then, the deniers are firmly in control. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. I think it would help if you put your comment beneath whatever you were replying to. :) However, assuming I understand what you're saying I will attempt a reply... The laws of physics don't *mandate* growing old and dying, they just make it overwhelmingly likely. But in a multiverse everything happens, even incredibly unlikely things... -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Our Demon-Haunted World
As I see it, the problem is connecting atmospheric disaster events to global warming. I have been looking for such a connection in the scientific literature and even in AGW blogs w/o success. Before going into physics I was an undergraduate student of mechanical engineering. In our fluid dynamic classes we learned that if you put more energy into a turbulent system, such as the atmosphere, then the turbulent fluctuations (read storms) vastly out pace the average increase of energy (read global temp). I recall some expressions of the relationship of fluctuations to averages, but that was in the 1950s. If any of you have read of such a relationship to explain the increased intensity of storms please let me know (with both barrels) and provide a link if possible. Richard On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:25 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 November 2013 22:56, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: This is laughable. Not a SINGLE article against human warming was publised in the main scientific magazines and you said that the process was perverted by the deniers? I have no option but to think that you believe en evil deamons with telepathic powers that try to hide your coming apocalypse. And you are right. I´m one of them. This night, by black magic, I will appear in your dreams and I will torment you. Careful whit me. Or you could look at TV advertising, with big expensive ads for cars, or at the paper with pull out sections which are trying to sell cars, or you could look at the TV news, which despite reporting virtually a new climate related disaster every week now, hardly ever mentions that it might be linked to global warming (unless it's to point out that no single storn can be directly linked to global warming - the only mention I've heard recently). Now add up how many people read science magazines and how many watch car adverts on TV. Now maybe you can see who is in charge of shaping our opinions. When car ads are banned, as cigarette ads are, there may be some tiny amount of truth in what you say. (Although by the time *that* happens, Auckland will probably be underwater.) But until then, the deniers are firmly in control. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
My email service does not allow me to interleave comments. Regarding your reply, the laws of biophysics does MANDATE growing old and dying. I think the more advanced understanding of the multiverse is that incredibly unlikely things do not happen. As I recall the argument was based on decoherence and the relationship of frequency of a particular universe to probability. So if a universe is unlikely, it will take a longtime to materialize. I imagined this to be longer than your lifetime. Richard On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:28 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. I think it would help if you put your comment beneath whatever you were replying to. :) However, assuming I understand what you're saying I will attempt a reply... The laws of physics don't *mandate* growing old and dying, they just make it overwhelmingly likely. But in a multiverse everything happens, even incredibly unlikely things... -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com mailto:yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. I think it would help if you put your comment beneath whatever you were replying to. :) However, assuming I understand what you're saying I will attempt a reply... The laws of physics don't /mandate/ growing old and dying, they just make it overwhelmingly likely. But in a multiverse everything happens, even incredibly unlikely things... That's another dubious popularization. Certainly weird things can happen in a QM world. But *everything*? There are still conservation laws, superselection rules, limited speed of signaling. Repeating measurement doesn't produce every value, it produces the same eigenvalue as before. Many QM processes are deterministic in one world, c.f. arXiv:quant-ph/070212v1. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 16:51, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: My email service does not allow me to interleave comments. Well in that case maybe you could cut and paste the relevant quote. There was an awful lot of text after your comment, I still have no idea what you were replying to. Regarding your reply, the laws of biophysics does MANDATE growing old and dying. No it doesn't, it's all statistical. The laws of physics only mandate growing old and dying to the extent that they mandate eggs breaking rather than broken eggs reforming into whole ones. However the underlying physics of eggs breaking is a series of time-reversible operations at the atomic level, hence it is possible for broken eggs to mend themselves if all the atomic movements were exactly right, which they never are in practice, of course. But in a multiverse such an unlikely event would occur somewhere. I think the more advanced understanding of the multiverse is that incredibly unlikely things do not happen. In that case it isn't the multiverse of quantum theory, which allows all possible events to occur, including the very unlikely ones. As I recall the argument was based on decoherence and the relationship of frequency of a particular universe to probability. So if a universe is unlikely, it will take a longtime to materialize. I imagined this to be longer than your lifetime. As I understand it the multiverse as envisaged by Everett and Deutsch involves all possible outcomes of a given situation occurring, with no time delay (except for whatever time delay would occur anyway). Decoherence is the mechanism that stops different branches of the multiverse interacting, it has nothing to do with the probability of a branch existing. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 17:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. I think it would help if you put your comment beneath whatever you were replying to. :) However, assuming I understand what you're saying I will attempt a reply... The laws of physics don't *mandate* growing old and dying, they just make it overwhelmingly likely. But in a multiverse everything happens, even incredibly unlikely things... That's another dubious popularization. Certainly weird things can happen in a QM world. But *everything*? There are still conservation laws, superselection rules, limited speed of signaling. Repeating measurement doesn't produce every value, it produces the same eigenvalue as before. Many QM processes are deterministic in one world, c.f. arXiv:quant-ph/070212v1. I apologise for my over hasty phraseology. I meant to say everything that is physically possible happens - i.e. all physically possible outcomes of each (apparently probabalistic) quantum event. I didn't mean to imply that *physically impossible* things happen (and it would have been nice if you'd done me the courtesy of thinking that perhaps that was what I meant, rather than assuming that oh, she must be spouting dubious popularisations! as you appear to have done.) -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 8:08 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 17:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com mailto:yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. I think it would help if you put your comment beneath whatever you were replying to. :) However, assuming I understand what you're saying I will attempt a reply... The laws of physics don't /mandate/ growing old and dying, they just make it overwhelmingly likely. But in a multiverse everything happens, even incredibly unlikely things... That's another dubious popularization. Certainly weird things can happen in a QM world. But *everything*? There are still conservation laws, superselection rules, limited speed of signaling. Repeating measurement doesn't produce every value, it produces the same eigenvalue as before. Many QM processes are deterministic in one world, c.f. arXiv:quant-ph/070212v1. I apologise for my over hasty phraseology. I meant to say everything that is physically possible happens - i.e. all physically possible outcomes of each (apparently probabalistic) quantum event. I didn't mean to imply that /physically impossible/ things happen (and it would have been nice if you'd done me the courtesy of thinking that perhaps that was what I meant, rather than assuming that oh, she must be spouting dubious popularisations! as you appear to have done.) Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. But it's a point that bothers me about a lot of these everything theories. Yes, they only mean everything that is possible - but that could be a big hole in theory when you start to talk about really strange things. For example, holographic theory (combined with QM) limits the amount of information within a Hubble radius. It's not immediately obvious whether that prohibits some evolution of the quantum state or not, but it's plausible that it does. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:12 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 5:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from anesthesia. Did you leave out a no? It was intentional, I meant there is a continuation, as in subjectively one moment leads directly to the next. There is a continuation, but not of consciousness. But isn't there? Are you saying you don't survive general anesthesia? Does it not seem like you are conscious one moment, then conscious of the next? Would you say the same true for an amnesiac being anesthetized? I think so. An amnesiac is just someone who can't remember some significant block of time that almost anyone else would. Last January while vacationing in Hawaii my daughter went down the beach and took a class in surfing. According to the instructor she did fine and nothing strange happened. She came back to the hotel, went in and took a shower. When she came out of the shower she realized that she could not remember *anything* about that day. She also had short term memory problems, e.g. she would repeat something she had just said a minute before. We took her to the hospital; they couldn't find any cause and finally just said, Well that happens sometimes to people and nobody knows why. Over the next day her short term memory became normal - but she still doesn't remember that day. Interesting, I was not aware that kind of thing can just happen to people. In my hypothetical, however, I meant someone with absolutely no memories. Is it not the case they can have a (subjectively) continuous experience of losing consciousness and regaining it? 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. Richard, see the link I posted earlier, ( http://higgo.com/qti/rplaga.htm ) in which James Higgo suggests that via quantum mechanics, his particles could spontaneously rearrange himself into a younger version of himself, hence he would de-age in a very small fraction of universes in which he exists. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 11/12/2013 9:38 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:12 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 5:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from anesthesia. Did you leave out a no? It was intentional, I meant there is a continuation, as in subjectively one moment leads directly to the next. There is a continuation, but not of consciousness. But isn't there? Are you saying you don't survive general anesthesia? Does it not seem like you are conscious one moment, then conscious of the next? Yes, but it also seems like there's a gap, a discontinuity in memory and experience. Which is not surprising. Our brains do a lot of creative 'filling in' of our perception of the world. But when the gap gets to big your brain doesn't know what to put in there and you notice the discontinuity. I once crashed off a big jump in a motocross race. I remember going up the face of the jump...and then the next thing I remember is looking up into the face of this guy who was saying, Are you all right? Notice that's the way people usually describe it: ...the next thing I remember was... Would you say the same true for an amnesiac being anesthetized? I think so. An amnesiac is just someone who can't remember some significant block of time that almost anyone else would. Last January while vacationing in Hawaii my daughter went down the beach and took a class in surfing. According to the instructor she did fine and nothing strange happened. She came back to the hotel, went in and took a shower. When she came out of the shower she realized that she could not remember *anything* about that day. She also had short term memory problems, e.g. she would repeat something she had just said a minute before. We took her to the hospital; they couldn't find any cause and finally just said, Well that happens sometimes to people and nobody knows why. Over the next day her short term memory became normal - but she still doesn't remember that day. Interesting, I was not aware that kind of thing can just happen to people. In my hypothetical, however, I meant someone with absolutely no memories. Is it not the case they can have a (subjectively) continuous experience of losing consciousness and regaining it? But did you mean someone who had no memories before some point? Or did you mean someone who cannot form any memories? I don't think a person who cannot form *any* memories is even conscious, at least in the normal sense. Even the rare clinical case of a person who is said to be unable to form memories, like Gustave Molaison, the person seems to have a memory span of a minute or so. Whether he could notice the gap caused by anesthesia or a concussion, I don't know. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Spacetime is (nonphysical, platonic) mind
On 13 November 2013 17:20, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 8:08 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 17:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote: On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every universe. I think it would help if you put your comment beneath whatever you were replying to. :) However, assuming I understand what you're saying I will attempt a reply... The laws of physics don't *mandate* growing old and dying, they just make it overwhelmingly likely. But in a multiverse everything happens, even incredibly unlikely things... That's another dubious popularization. Certainly weird things can happen in a QM world. But *everything*? There are still conservation laws, superselection rules, limited speed of signaling. Repeating measurement doesn't produce every value, it produces the same eigenvalue as before. Many QM processes are deterministic in one world, c.f. arXiv:quant-ph/070212v1. I apologise for my over hasty phraseology. I meant to say everything that is physically possible happens - i.e. all physically possible outcomes of each (apparently probabalistic) quantum event. I didn't mean to imply that *physically impossible* things happen (and it would have been nice if you'd done me the courtesy of thinking that perhaps that was what I meant, rather than assuming that oh, she must be spouting dubious popularisations! as you appear to have done.) Sorry. Didn't mean to offend. But it's a point that bothers me about a lot of these everything theories. Yes, they only mean everything that is possible - but that could be a big hole in theory when you start to talk about really strange things. For example, holographic theory (combined with QM) limits the amount of information within a Hubble radius. It's not immediately obvious whether that prohibits some evolution of the quantum state or not, but it's plausible that it does. Sorry for overreacting. Obviously one has to go to the equations and see what they say. In the case of quantum mechanics I believe they say that any interaction has a continuum of outcomes, so we're immediately dealing with infinity. David Deutsch has been known to talk about Harry Potter universes in which magic appears to work thanks to quantum uncertainty, so it seems to me that if you take the multiverse seriously you have an incredible range of outcomes - none of which violate the various conservation principles, but some - an infinitesimal sliver - which appear to. So for example, it's possible that in tiny parts of the multiverse objects spontaneously materialise from quantum fluctuations - a teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars, say. This isn't something I feel very comfortable with, to be honest. Like Blaise Pascal's The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me, I feel - to say the least - frightened just contemplating the possibility that everything (including me) is replicated infinitely. It is such a mind-boggling idea that it seems to utterly dwarf anything I can possibly do, or even think. Everything has been thought already, an infinite number of times. Any fiction I may invent has happened somewhere (an infinite number of times). It's quite - daunting. Holographic theory indicates that the amount of entropy in a given volume is less than the entropy of a black hole of the same radius, which I believe is proportional to the surface area of that black hole. But wasn't that result contradicted by the recent discovery that there isn't a granularity to space larger than some minute fraction of the Planck size? Excuse me I have to go and lie down... -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
