On 13 Oct 2013, at 22:11, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/13/2013 1:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Oct 2013, at 22:53, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/12/2013 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11 Oct 2013, at 03:25, meekerdb wrote:
So there are infinitely many identical universes preceding a
measurement. How are these universes distinct from one
another? Do they divide into two infinite subsets on a binary
measurement, or do infinitely many come into existence in order
that some branch-counting measure produces the right
proportion? Do you not see any problems with assigning a
measure to infinite countable subsets (are there more even
numbers that square numbers?).
And why should we prefer this model to simply saying the Born
rule derives from a Bayesian epistemic view of QM as argued by,
for example, Chris Fuchs?
If you can explain to me how this makes the parallel
"experiences", (then), disappearing, please do.
I don't understand the question. What parallel experiences do you
refer to? And you're asking why they disappeared?
The question is "how does Fuchs prevent a superposition to be
contagious on the observer"
I think he takes an instrumentalist view of the wave function - so
superpositions are just something that happens in the mathematics.
But then I don't see how this could fit with even just the one photon
interference in the two slits experiment.
When I read Fuchs I thought this: Comp suggest a compromise: yes
the "quantum wave" describes only psychological states, but they
concern still a *many* dreams/worlds/physical-realities,
including the many self-multiplication.
There is no "many" in Fuchs interpretation, there is only the
personal subjective probabilities of contemplated futures.
I notice the plural of "futures". Are those not "many"?
Sure, but they are contemplated, not reified.
OK. But apparently object of contemplation can interfere with the
real, which is a bit weird to me.
I know Fuchs criticize Everett, but I don't see how he makes the
superposition disappearing. he only makes them psychological, which
is not a problem for me. there are still "many".
Yes, that's why I said I think his approach is consistent with
yours. I think Fuchs view of QM is similar to what William S.
Cooper calls for at the end of his book "The Evolution of Reason" -
a probabilistic extension of logic. This is essentially the view he
defends at length in "Interview with a Quantum Bayesian", arXiv:
1207.2141v1
OK.
It is still Everett wave as seen from inside.
We just don't know if the dreams defined an unique (multiversal)
physical reality. Neither in Everett +GR, nor in comp.
Bayesian epistemic view is no problem, but you have to define
what is the knower, the observer, etc. If not, it falls into a
cosmic form of solipsism, and it can generate some strong "don't
ask" imperative.
You assume that if others are not explained they must be rejected.
I just ask for an explanation of the terms that they introduce.
I think he takes the observer as primitive and undefined (and I
think you do the same).
What? Not at all. the observer is defined by its set of beliefs,
itself define by a relative universal numbers. Comp has a pretty well
defined notion of observer, with its octalist points of view, and an
whole theology including his physics, etc.
Physicists, like Fuchs, and unlike philosophers, are generally
comfortable with not explaining everything.
Me too. but he has still to explain the terms that he is using.
What's your explanation for the existence of persons? So far what
I've heard is that it's an inside view of arithmetic - which I don't
find very enlightening.
What do you miss in the UDA?
Fuchs, correctly I think, says an 'interpretation' of a theory, the
story that goes along with the mathematics, is important insofar as
it gives you insight into how to apply the mathematics and to extend
your theories. He is critical of Everett's MWI for not doing that,
or at least not doing it well.
Well, perhaps Fuchs is a bit out of topic, once you agree that it is
only Everett in a psychological version. That is close to comp. But
comp leads, by UDA, that the theory of everuthing is just elementary
arithmetic (or Turing equivalent, like colmbinatirs, ...). Then
everything is defined in a very precise way in that theory.
And this explains both 100% matter and 99,999... % of consciousness.
The explanation might be false, of course, but is testable.
Bruno
Brent
Bruno
Brent
"I mistrust all systematizers and avoid them. The will to a system
is a lack of integrity."
--- Fredrick Nietzsche, "Twilight of the Idols"
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3614/6742 - Release Date:
10/11/13
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-
l...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.