Title: Re: Many Fermis Revisited
At 22:47 +0100 13/01/2003, scerir wrote:
[George
Levy]
Here is a (white) hared
brained idea
on how to build a time
machine.
You need a very good
recording device
and a Quantum Suicide
(QS) machine.
For a simpler device
see:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/chan
[George Levy]
Here is a (white) hared brained idea
on how to build a time machine.
You need a very good recording device
and a Quantum Suicide (QS) machine.
For a simpler device see:http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/chan-evid.html
[Tim May]
I am quite strongly persuaded that "many pasts for a
Tim May wrote
If you mean that
"many presents" have "many pasts," yes. But the current present only has
a limited number of pasts, possibly just one. (The origin of this asymmetry
in the lattice of events is related to our being in one present.)
I mean one (many?) present has many past
On Monday, January 13, 2003, at 10:47 AM, George Levy wrote:
Tim, Hal, Russell
Since we have several futures ( and several pasts), time travel is
just a particular case of many-world travel.
I somewhat agree...and we are not the first to make this point.
However, we need to be careful about
Tim, Hal, Russell
Since we have several futures ( and several pasts), time travel is just a
particular case of many-world travel.
Here is a (white) hared brained idea on how to build a time machine. You
need a very good recording device and a Quantum Suicide (QS) machine.
1) You allow
Tim May wrote:
>
>
> Imagine what will happen if strong MWI communication happens in our
> universe, our branch:
>
> -- presumably access to all of the manifold knowledge from every
> universe which has done science, engineering, etc.
>
> -- vast amounts of technology (as some universes are
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 06:54 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
(I'll limit myself to only commenting on the last, and most interesting, point.)
This is where I lose your argument. I can't see why an MWI
communication capable civilisation should be able to spread throughout
our universe any fas
Tim May wrote:
> I made no assumptions of nondifficulty (to use your phrasing).
>
> This is in fact why I picked the Thogians a few hundred million
> light-years from us. Now perhaps you think advanced civilizations are
> even rarer than in this example, there have not yet been any
> civilizati
On Sunday, January 12, 2003, at 05:38 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
The key assumption here is whether advanced technological civilisation
(such as ourselves) is easy or difficult on the timescale of the age
of the universe (10^10 years).
Assuming that this is difficult (contra to your comments b
Michael Clive Price wrote and widely distributed his "Many-Worlds FAQ"
back in the 90s, and he has a couple of questions that touch on this
topic:
http://www.hedweb.com/everett/everett.htm#linear
Is physics linear?
Could we ever communicate with the other worlds?
http://www.hedweb.com/everett/eve
The key assumption here is whether advanced technological civilisation
(such as ourselves) is easy or difficult on the timescale of the age
of the universe (10^10 years).
Assuming that this is difficult (contra to your comments below),
solves the standard Fermi paradox (namely other advanced civil
11 matches
Mail list logo
