Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 07:30, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:16 PM smitra wrote: On 11-05-2022 06:01, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:51 PM smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote: Such models are certainly inconsistent with the SE. So if your

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 07:28, Brent Meeker wrote: On 5/10/2022 8:17 PM, smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 6:37 AM smitra wrote: On 08-05-2022 05:58, Bruce Kellett wrote: It is when you take the SE to imply that all possible outcomes exist on each

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 9:24 AM smitra wrote: > On 11-05-2022 07:30, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > > > Who proved that the universe was finite? > > > > If it's infinite, one can focus on only the visible part of it. > The visible part is only locally defined -- go to the edge and there is another,

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 9:08 AM smitra wrote: > On 11-05-2022 08:14, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:39 PM Brent Meeker > > wrote: > > > >> On 5/10/2022 9:43 PM, smitra wrote: > >> > >>> If there are only a finite number of states the entire universe can be > >>> in, then

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:39 PM Brent Meeker wrote: > On 5/10/2022 9:43 PM, smitra wrote: > > > If there are only a finite number of states the entire universe can be > > in, then that's also true for observers. > > So what does the SE for this discrete universe look like? The one every > cites

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:25 AM Bruce Kellett wrote: *> The SE also has many problems* The Schrodinger equation has ONE problem, SE can't account for gravity; General Relativity can but GR can't account for anything else. Maybe when we find one physical idea that covers everything it will

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:25 AM Brent Meeker wrote: > > * > Well, there's a big fat hint that it [SE] breaks down FAPP in every > measurement, in every bit of physics that appears classical and > irreversible. * The thing is, whenever somebody says FAPP they really don't mean for *ALL*

FW: FW: FW: FW: [Consciousness-Online] FW: Is Artificial Life Conscious?

general_the...@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: FW: FW: FW: [Consciousness-Online] FW: Is Artificial Life Conscious? [Philip Benjamin] How much more precisely can PHYSICAL be defined? There are five fundamental questions pertaining to any observation: what,

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 5/11/2022 1:06 PM, smitra wrote: That's complete and audacious question begging.  What you mean by "real" is "modeled within the SE".  There is NOTHING BUT collapse experimentally; every result recorded in every notebook and every tape is evidence of a collapse. There is effective

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 8:36 AM smitra wrote: > On 11-05-2022 07:42, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > That's complete and audacious question begging. What you mean by > > "real" is "modeled within the SE". There is NOTHING BUT collapse > > experimentally; every result recorded in every notebook and

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 5/11/2022 11:51 AM, smitra wrote: On 11-05-2022 07:25, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:11 PM smitra wrote: On 11-05-2022 06:06, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:56 PM smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:34, Bruce Kellett wrote: That still treats the SE as

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 07:42, Brent Meeker wrote: On 5/10/2022 9:47 PM, smitra wrote: On 11-05-2022 06:06, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:56 PM smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:34, Bruce Kellett wrote: That still treats the SE as indubitally true. No theory in physics is

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 5/10/2022 11:14 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:39 PM Brent Meeker wrote: On 5/10/2022 9:43 PM, smitra wrote: > If there are only a finite number of states the entire universe can be > in, then that's also true for observers. So what does the SE

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 07:25, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:11 PM smitra wrote: On 11-05-2022 06:06, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:56 PM smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:34, Bruce Kellett wrote: That still treats the SE as indubitally true. No theory in physics

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 07:39, Brent Meeker wrote: On 5/10/2022 9:43 PM, smitra wrote: On 11-05-2022 06:01, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:51 PM smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote: Such models are certainly inconsistent with the SE. So if your concern is that

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 07:25, Brent Meeker wrote: On 5/10/2022 8:11 PM, smitra wrote: On 09-05-2022 00:34, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 6:52 AM smitra wrote: On 08-05-2022 06:04, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 11:21 AM smitra wrote: The issues with branches etc. are

Re: The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism

On 11-05-2022 08:14, Bruce Kellett wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:39 PM Brent Meeker wrote: On 5/10/2022 9:43 PM, smitra wrote: If there are only a finite number of states the entire universe can be in, then that's also true for observers. So what does the SE for this discrete