I wasn't aware this thread had fallen off the list. I will make sure
this post goes through...
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:26:47AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Russell,
Of course I disagree. I can explain later. But is it not better to
discuss this on line?
If it is ok for you, just
I just realized that "MWI" in the discussion meant "many worlds immortality" not the standard "many worlds interpretation".I don't have a lot time to sift through the discussions, soI missed that point.I don't buy "MW Immortality " in that case, so it hasn't had any effect on my worldview at all.
: Re: Implications of MWI
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 18:15:38 -0500
No. For me, it explained a number things that I had questions about.
Learning that there seemed to be a scientific reason for what was going on
changed my worldview. It added order to what was beginning to look rather
chaotic
The MWI made me take the idea of multiple universes/multiple realities
serious. When I joined this list I believed that quantum suicide could work,
but I later found out that it cannot possibly work. I now believe that there
exists an ensemble of all possible mathematical
No. For me, it explained a number things that I had questions about. Learning that there seemed to be a scientific reason for what was going on changed my worldview. It added order to what was beginning to look rather chaotic.- Original Message - From: "Mark Fancey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To:
- Original Message -
From: Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: John M [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 5:33 PM
Subject: RE: Implications of MWI
-Original Message-
From: John M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 4:03 PM
To: Stathis Papaioannou
Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: John M [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Jesse Mazer [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: Implications of MWI
John Mikes wrote (in part):
Your example ...a hydrogen atom is made up of an electron and a proton,
... is asking for the question: and an electron? and a proton? and so
on - but the main deficiency of your (reductionist) statement is to
consider
for the alleged material(?) particles as to
Le 29-avr.-05, à 02:32, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :
Norman Samish writes:
Jonathan,
If it is true that In infinite time and infinite space, whatever
can
happen, must happen, not only once but an infinite number of times,
then
what does probability mean? In your example below, there
Le 29-avr.-05, à 00:41, Russell Standish a écrit :
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 04:00:10PM -0400, John M wrote:
Jesse, thanks for the explanation you gave to Norman. I did not want
to ask
something similar, so I benefit from it as well.
My question however is a more fundamental one:
why are we stuck
John Mikes wrote:
I don't think I really can expect a reply to this question: I am in the
same
boat of reductionist thinking, just dream about more.
John, this is the second time you have mentioned reductionist thinking ijn
the last few days. Could you briefly explain what reductionism is and
@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: Implications of MWI
: Implications of MWI
John Mikes wrote:
I don't think I really can expect a reply to this question: I am in the
same
boat of reductionist thinking, just dream about more.
John, this is the second time you have mentioned reductionist thinking ijn
the last few days. Could you briefly explain what
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:32:44AM -0400, John M wrote:
Russell wrote:
The reason for TIME is the need for a dimension in which to make
comparisons, to measure differences. Computationalism (Bruno's working
hypothesis implicitly assumes TIME). With TIME, the Anthropic Principle and
From: Norman Samish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Implications of MWI
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:30:31 -0700
Jonathan,
If it is true that In infinite time and infinite space, whatever can
happen, must happen, not only once but an infinite
Le 27-avr.-05, à 23:30, Mark Fancey a écrit :
I am taking this from the saying:
'everything that can happen does happen and is happening
right now'
Right, but only with a measure relative to your actual state. It would
be absurd
not to drink coffee when you want it under the pretext
Rather the same for me. QTI or just compi makes disappear the fear of
death ... only to (re)discover that the real fear is the fear of life
... (and of course this makes immortality a rather bad new ...).
But also, I have no certainties at all, and such mood/feeling is driven
much more by
John Mikes
- Original Message -
From: Jesse Mazer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: Implications of MWI
From: Norman Samish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 04:00:10PM -0400, John M wrote:
Jesse, thanks for the explanation you gave to Norman. I did not want to ask
something similar, so I benefit from it as well.
My question however is a more fundamental one:
why are we stuck in a MWI or its infinitely expanded format,
Norman Samish writes:
Jonathan,
If it is true that In infinite time and infinite space, whatever can
happen, must happen, not only once but an infinite number of times, then
what does probability mean? In your example below, there must be an
infinity of worlds where Colin Powell is
Mark Fancey writes:
Did accepting and understanding the MWI drastically alter your
philosophical worldview? If so, how?
I don't know if I would describe it as a drastic alteration, but I do
tend to think of my actions as provoking a continuum of results rather
than a single result. For
Hal:
You say that you are more careful now (and everyone should always be
more careful!); but is it not, in fact, irrelevant? This is because
the worlds in which you cause great tragedy exist even before you
arrive at a branch point that could take you to them.
I am taking this from the saying:
Mark Fancey writes:
Did accepting and understanding the MWI drastically alter your
philosophical worldview? If so, how?
Hal: I don't know if I would describe it as a drastic alteration,
but I do tend to think of my actions as provoking a continuum
of results rather than a single result.
, must happen, not only once but an infinite number of times.
Norman
- Original Message -
From: Mark Fancey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Implications of MWI
Hal:
You say that you
Norman wrote:
If it is true that In infinite time and infinite space,
whatever can happen, must happen, not only once but an
infinite number of times, then what does probability mean?
In your example below, there must be an infinity of worlds
where Colin Powell is president and an infinity
25 matches
Mail list logo
