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

From: John M <jamikes.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:00:10 -0400

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, where qualia,

systems, functions, ideation, whatever are unrestricted and maybe quite

different from ours here, CORNERED into a time-concept of this (our) feeble

little universe?

Same to all principles expresed amply about dimensions, comp, space,

Q-considerations, even reality and ourselves?

Either we take it seriously that 'other' universes (units of the existence

whatever that may mean) are DIFFERENT, or we make a template of ourselves

(our world) and call it the infinite aspects.

(The same way of thinking how the age of this universe (date of the BB) was

calculated in a linear retrogradation maintaining for those early and

absolutely different 'physical' conditions all our 'laws' of this system. -

IFFF the univers really is expanding, of course, even then chaotically, not

linearly as it is rolled back.)

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.

Cheers

John Mikes

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jesse Mazer" <lasermazer.domain.name.hidden>

To: <ncsamish.domain.name.hidden>; <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:14 AM

Subject: Re: Implications of MWI

*> >From: "Norman Samish" <ncsamish.domain.name.hidden>
*

*> >To: <jcolvin.domain.name.hidden>
*

*> >CC: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
*

*> >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 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 of
*

*> >worlds
*

*> >where your 6-year old niece is president. Are you saying that the Colin
*

*> >Powell infinity is bigger than the 6-year old niece infinity?
*

*> >Norman
*

*>
*

*> Yes, the concept of assigning different probabilities to different
*

infinite

*> subsets of an infinite set is what the branch of math called "measure
*

*> theory" is all about (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measure_theory ),
*

*> that's why you often see people on this list talking about the "measure"
*

of

*> different worlds or observer-moments. As an example, if the possible
*

*> outcomes are the set of real numbers from 0 to 1, and if the probability
*

*> function was y=2x, then the probability that the outcome would be within
*

any

*> given range (say, x=0.24 to x=0.97878...) would just be the area under the
*

*> function in that range (note that the area of y=2x from x=0 to x=1 is 1,
*

*> just as it should be if it's supposed to represent probability).
*

*>
*

*> Jesse
*

*>
*

*>
*

Received on Thu Apr 28 2005 - 16:43:00 PDT

Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:00:10 -0400

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, where qualia,

systems, functions, ideation, whatever are unrestricted and maybe quite

different from ours here, CORNERED into a time-concept of this (our) feeble

little universe?

Same to all principles expresed amply about dimensions, comp, space,

Q-considerations, even reality and ourselves?

Either we take it seriously that 'other' universes (units of the existence

whatever that may mean) are DIFFERENT, or we make a template of ourselves

(our world) and call it the infinite aspects.

(The same way of thinking how the age of this universe (date of the BB) was

calculated in a linear retrogradation maintaining for those early and

absolutely different 'physical' conditions all our 'laws' of this system. -

IFFF the univers really is expanding, of course, even then chaotically, not

linearly as it is rolled back.)

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.

Cheers

John Mikes

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jesse Mazer" <lasermazer.domain.name.hidden>

To: <ncsamish.domain.name.hidden>; <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:14 AM

Subject: Re: Implications of MWI

can

infinite

of

any

Received on Thu Apr 28 2005 - 16:43:00 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:10 PST
*