Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On 08 Nov 2014, at 04:55, LizR wrote: On 8 November 2014 11:50, zibb...@gmail.com wrote: Sure, but in the same vein as where Peter goes, photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. I have'n't heard an answer to that yet, that addresses significance proper. We're getting preference every time. Have a go at that:O) I would need more information about how photosynthesis finds the most efficient path before I can answer that. Quantum immortality involves things which are incredibly unlikely, like a spontaneous quantum jup of all the atoms in your body, or similarly possible but more-than-astronomically-unlikely scenarios. I doubt if photosynthesis has a 1 in a googolplex chance of working! Of course not. The idea is only that photosynthesis, in the manner of a quantum information processing machine, exploits some interference to harness better the energy of light. There are few chance a brain does this, but then: who know? Of course QI is not related to this, because we survive anyway. Salme with the less demanding computationalist theory. In fact, there are my form of immortaility possible, some depending on what you decide to be. Bruno -- 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/d/optout. 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On Saturday, November 8, 2014 3:55:43 AM UTC, Liz R wrote: On 8 November 2014 11:50, zib...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: Sure, but in the same vein as where Peter goes, photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. I have'n't heard an answer to that yet, that addresses significance proper. We're getting preference every time. Have a go at that:O) I would need more information about how photosynthesis finds the most efficient path before I can answer that. Quantum immortality involves things which are incredibly unlikely, like a spontaneous quantum jup of all the atoms in your body, or similarly possible but more-than-astronomically-unlikely scenarios. I doubt if photosynthesis has a 1 in a googolplex chance of working! I thought there might be a criteria for perhaps a personal falsification of MWI for anyone wanting to be in that space. Isn't the fact photosynthesis occurs on a vast scale in terms of these events, and it would seem always involves the most efficient path. Doesn't that require a large number of universes never to get that path Some perhaps get the 2nd most efficient and so on? That sounds like grounds for serious question mark over MWI. Or do I have this wrong? In regard what you said you'd need to know more about. Wellif it's an opportunity to resolve a huge matter in your worldview it might be worth your while. Just for entertainment, the Popperians on FoR ran multiyear rackets involving apparently giving reasonable responses to basically knock down science wiped large sections of their worldview off the table. They say what they'd need to know more about. And make a long list. And of course no one was going to bother doing that work for them. So the same things would come around and get the same responses. For years. It would be hard to see a good theory that didn't involve dishonest and insincere behaviour around that. It was an entertaining racket on many occasions, for me, I have to admit. NOT suggesting a parallel here. But you can see the issues. Would it settle something important for you? If so, is there a case to find out what you need to know. I don't know the answer. -- 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:50 PM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote: photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. That is incorrect. Using natural sunlight the maximum theoretical efficiency in turning water and CO2 into glucose and free oxygen (photosynthesis) is 11%. For real plants the specific biochemical steps used varies according to species and so the efficiency ranges from 3 to 6%, nowhere near the maximum. But this shouldn't be surprising, Evolution never finds the perfect solution to a problem because it doesn't need to, it just needs to find a solution that's better than the competition. By the way, typical solar cells are about 20% efficient, and some very exotic (and very expensive) ones can reach 40%. Which just goes to show that human intelligent design beats the hell out of random mutation and natural selection even though it had 4 billion years to work on the problem and we've only been working on it for a decade or two. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 6:25:37 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:50 PM, zib...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. That is incorrect. Using natural sunlight the maximum theoretical efficiency in turning water and CO2 into glucose and free oxygen (photosynthesis) is 11%. For real plants the specific biochemical steps used varies according to species and so the efficiency ranges from 3 to 6%, nowhere near the maximum. But this shouldn't be surprising, Evolution never finds the perfect solution to a problem because it doesn't need to, it just needs to find a solution that's better than the competition. By the way, typical solar cells are about 20% efficient, and some very exotic (and very expensive) ones can reach 40%. Which just goes to show that human intelligent design beats the hell out of random mutation and natural selection even though it had 4 billion years to work on the problem and we've only been working on it for a decade or two. Well...I was definitely bluffing in some significant way. And you definitely called it, so the first hand is yours :o) The sense I was bluffing is that I don't have the knowledge at the level to actually understand the assertion I'm making. But...what I do have is a really intelligent quantum theorist...a young guy I saw first on the telly in some sort of intelligence competition. He won. He was also the most modest and definitely did his dutiful best to explain his enormous intellect away as in physics we have to solve puzzles like this routinely so I know all the tricks. Then I saw him again in this other show about photosynthesis, or that included reference to that. And he is the one that clearly states exactly what I stated to Liz. Bluff called. I shall have to pay up for you both now. I'll work out what his name is or what the show was, and get the youtube if possible and/or email him and get him to stick his head round the door to account for himself. He'll probably be up for it. I'll be back -- 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 6:25:37 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:50 PM, zib...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. That is incorrect. Using natural sunlight the maximum theoretical efficiency in turning water and CO2 into glucose and free oxygen (photosynthesis) is 11%. For real plants the specific biochemical steps used varies according to species and so the efficiency ranges from 3 to 6%, nowhere near the maximum. But this shouldn't be surprising, Evolution never finds the perfect solution to a problem because it doesn't need to, it just needs to find a solution that's better than the competition. By the way, typical solar cells are about 20% efficient, and some very exotic (and very expensive) ones can reach 40%. Which just goes to show that human intelligent design beats the hell out of random mutation and natural selection even though it had 4 billion years to work on the problem and we've only been working on it for a decade or two. p.s. This much I vaguely had the measure of. But the efficiency of the whole cell is not the context. It's the individual event. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On 11/15/2014 10:25 AM, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:50 PM, zibb...@gmail.com mailto:zibb...@gmail.com wrote: photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. That is incorrect. Using natural sunlight the maximum theoretical efficiency in turning water and CO2 into glucose and free oxygen (photosynthesis) is 11%. For real plants the specific biochemical steps used varies according to species and so the efficiency ranges from 3 to 6%, nowhere near the maximum. But this shouldn't be surprising, Evolution never finds the perfect solution to a problem because it doesn't need to, it just needs to find a solution that's better than the competition. By the way, typical solar cells are about 20% efficient, and some very exotic (and very expensive) ones can reach 40%. Or even not so exotic solar-thermal power stations which can reach 48%. Brent Which just goes to show that human intelligent design beats the hell out of random mutation and natural selection even though it had 4 billion years to work on the problem and we've only been working on it for a decade or two. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 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/d/optout. -- 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 8:22:37 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 11/15/2014 10:25 AM, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:50 PM, zib...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: photosynthesis in this universe always finds the most efficient path where there are many others. That is incorrect. Using natural sunlight the maximum theoretical efficiency in turning water and CO2 into glucose and free oxygen (photosynthesis) is 11%. For real plants the specific biochemical steps used varies according to species and so the efficiency ranges from 3 to 6%, nowhere near the maximum. But this shouldn't be surprising, Evolution never finds the perfect solution to a problem because it doesn't need to, it just needs to find a solution that's better than the competition. By the way, typical solar cells are about 20% efficient, and some very exotic (and very expensive) ones can reach 40%. Or even not so exotic solar-thermal power stations which can reach 48%. Yes but... Which just goes to show that human intelligent design beats the hell out of random mutation and natural selection even though it had 4 billion years to work on the problem and we've only been working on it for a decade or two. Actually this is invalid. Grounds being very logical and very standard. But context being very hard to parse in logic. More familiar contexts are resolved with linguistic supports, such as common-expressions like clichés can be. apples and pears, all else being equal / all else here not being equal, arbitrary terms of reference, cherry picking. Basically a selection is made from the life domain, effectively on arbitrary terms. A selection is made from human domain effectively on arbitrary terms; and a comparison follows that is therefore also on arbitrary terms. And the value of that old boy is arbitrarily settled, in this case probably in a cloud of commonly shared vaguely uninterested distraction. -- 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/d/optout.
Re: Methusalem problem for MWI?
On 8 November 2014 02:39, Peter Sas peterjacco...@gmail.com wrote: O.K. I think I get it... The number of branches in which people miraculously survive is astronomically lower than the number of branches where people die according to the odds Hence the likelihood that our world contains Methuselah's (in Dutch we say Methusalem) is close to zero. Thanks for the explanation. Yes that's basically what I was trying to say. As you've just demonstrated I said it in about 100x more words than I needed to. -- 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/d/optout.
