Stabilizing the no-boundary proposal sheds light on the universe's quantum origins

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-stabilizing-no-boundary-universe-quantum.html *Stabilizing the no-boundary proposal sheds light on the universe's quantum origins* by Lisa Zyga , Phys.org One idea for how the universe began is that the universe may have appeared out of nothing due to some

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 11:42:12 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > First, it's false. You can make it true by interpreting "can happen" to > mean "can happen according the prediction of quantum mechanics for this > situation", but then it becomes trivial. Second, it's not "at the heart of

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

On 02-02-2020 04:48, Alan Grayson wrote: Can anyone offer a justification for this postulate, presumably at the heart of the MWI? Clark? AG Anything that can happen does happen and we can exploit that fact when we get electronic brains using the method explained here:

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

On 02-02-2020 12:32, Alan Grayson wrote: On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 11:42:12 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: First, it's false. You can make it true by interpreting "can happen" to mean "can happen according the prediction of quantum mechanics for this situation", but then it becomes trivial.

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

We probably can't ever know. What we call physical laws are local. Ultimately if there is only one global law that there is no law, and what is law according to symmetry = conservation principle is local then we are bounded from global observation by information or epistemic horizons. LC On

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

On 2/2/2020 2:59 PM, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 1:42 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: /> You can make it true by interpreting "can happen" to mean "can happen according the prediction of quantum mechanics for this

Re: A question about relativity

On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 11:43:36 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 2/1/2020 7:57 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 7:45:05 PM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 3:04:16 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On

Re: A question about relativity

On Sunday, February 2, 2020 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 11:43:36 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2/1/2020 7:57 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 7:45:05 PM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>

Re: A question about relativity

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 3:04 AM Alan Grayson wrote: > > > On Thursday, January 30, 2020 at 10:37:13 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 1/30/2020 5:37 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, January 30, 2020 at 6:29:18 PM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, January

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 1:42 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: * > You can make it true by interpreting "can happen" to mean "can happen > according the prediction of quantum mechanics for this situation", but then > it becomes trivial. * > I suppose

Re: Postulate: Everything that CAN happen, MUST happen.

On 2/2/2020 9:00 AM, smitra wrote: On 02-02-2020 12:32, Alan Grayson wrote: On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 11:42:12 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: First, it's false.  You can make it true by interpreting "can happen" to mean "can happen according the prediction of quantum mechanics for this