Re: Consistency? + Programs for G, G*, ...

From: Saibal Mitra <>
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 12:35:31 +0200

Bruno wrote:

> Saibal wrote:
> >The Great Programmer can presumably compute certain correlations between
> >our obserations of what we think is a star and the state of the observed
> >system itself. As I see it the Great Programmer outputs descriptions,
> >including descriptions of an astronomer observing a star. Why can't the
> >Great Programmer check the description of the astronomer of a star
> >his own description?
> You are putting to much in "the great programmer". The UD (at least)
> is only a "rather stupid" program which
> just generates and run all possible programs (in all computer language
> including quantum computers, etc.). If you personalise it so as to use
> expression like "his own description" then you should define it so that
> a term like "his" is well defined.

Ok. but I still maintain that, at least in principle, you should be able to
compute correlations because that´s ultimately what physics is all about.

> >What I meant was that the observer should have an exactly identical copy
> >a universe in which stars do exist. So the observer can't tell if stars
> >or don't exist, but it doesn't matter because he is exactly identical to
> >observer observing a real star.
> What does that change for the personal (relative) point of view. I
> don't understand.

It doesn´t, but the observer could claim that with high probability he is in
the universe with real stars because he has observed stars.
> > In your example you should replace Moscow by a virtual reality
> >representation of Moscow. One copy of you travels to the real Moscow, the
> >other copy is a digital version of you that is sent to the cyber-version
> >Moscow. Suppose that we didn't tell you that we would make a digital
> >of you. In that case your digital copy would think he is in ``real´´
> But even if the "material" copy go to Washington, the virtual copy
> will believe he is in the "real" Moscow. I'm not sure I understand you.
> Once the copies are made they are as independent as me and you. Isn'it?

Why would the copies be independent? Two identical copies in two identical
environments will continue to behave identically. Now if one of the two
environments is changed but the copy living there can't in principle notice
(his world is replaced by a virtual world, stars visible to him are not
simulated in detail, he could only notice this if he manages to travel to
one), he will still behave identically.
> >Yes but shouldn't all the ``doppelbrothersisters´´ be identified?
> How? and Why? If you do that please identify myself with any amoeba,
> planaria, ... yourself and any living creature from the multiverse.

I must have misunderstood the concept of ``doppelbrothersisters´´. I meant
that identical copies should be identified

Received on Sat Jun 09 2001 - 03:40:56 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:07 PST