- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Robin Hanson <hanson.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 10:14:24 -0800

Wei Dai writes:

*>What is the set of all possible universes? Max Tegmark says its the set of
*

*>all mathematical structures, and Juergen Schmidhuber says its the set of
*

*>all Turing machines, but neither gives much justification. I tend to agree
*

*>with Schmidhuber, if only because Tegmark's definition does not seem to
*

*>lead to an effective theory. For example, what does a uniform distribution
*

*>on all mathematical structures mean? However it would be nice to have some
*

*>stronger justifications for assuming that only computable universes exist.
*

I need to get back to even more basic basics.

1) There's a certain elegant simplicity to the claim "all possible universes

exist", at least if "possible" is interpreted as broadly as possible, i.e.,

"not logically inconsistent". But if you start substituting other meanings

for "possible", I think the elegance quickly disappears. You'd then still

have to explain why other non-logically-inconsistent universes don't exist,

and you'd have a bunch more weird universes to explain why we don't easily

observe them.

I find the many worlds theory of quantum mechanics elegant, but not because

it can be thought of as equally the above claim with a certain odd quantum

definition of "possible". I find it elegant because it seems simpler than

the known alternatives which account for the empirical data.

2) I can see why you might want some sort of prior over universes, so you

can make inferences about what universe you are in. But why should your

difficulty in choosing such a prior be an argument against universes

existing? Just because you have trouble thinking about a universe doesn't

mean it doesn't exist.

3) My basic problem with the "all possible universes exist" claim is that

I find it hard to figure out whether my actions have any consequences.

If all possible universes exist, then for any me in one universe choosing

one action, there is another me in another universe choosing another action.

In a global sense I can't choose actions anymore. All possible actions get

chosen.

Robin Hanson

hanson.domain.name.hidden http://hanson.berkeley.edu/

RWJF Health Policy Scholar, Sch. of Public Health 510-643-1884

140 Warren Hall, UC Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 FAX: 510-643-8614

Received on Tue Jan 20 1998 - 10:17:49 PST

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 10:14:24 -0800

Wei Dai writes:

I need to get back to even more basic basics.

1) There's a certain elegant simplicity to the claim "all possible universes

exist", at least if "possible" is interpreted as broadly as possible, i.e.,

"not logically inconsistent". But if you start substituting other meanings

for "possible", I think the elegance quickly disappears. You'd then still

have to explain why other non-logically-inconsistent universes don't exist,

and you'd have a bunch more weird universes to explain why we don't easily

observe them.

I find the many worlds theory of quantum mechanics elegant, but not because

it can be thought of as equally the above claim with a certain odd quantum

definition of "possible". I find it elegant because it seems simpler than

the known alternatives which account for the empirical data.

2) I can see why you might want some sort of prior over universes, so you

can make inferences about what universe you are in. But why should your

difficulty in choosing such a prior be an argument against universes

existing? Just because you have trouble thinking about a universe doesn't

mean it doesn't exist.

3) My basic problem with the "all possible universes exist" claim is that

I find it hard to figure out whether my actions have any consequences.

If all possible universes exist, then for any me in one universe choosing

one action, there is another me in another universe choosing another action.

In a global sense I can't choose actions anymore. All possible actions get

chosen.

Robin Hanson

hanson.domain.name.hidden http://hanson.berkeley.edu/

RWJF Health Policy Scholar, Sch. of Public Health 510-643-1884

140 Warren Hall, UC Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 FAX: 510-643-8614

Received on Tue Jan 20 1998 - 10:17:49 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST
*