On 11/26/2017 10:20 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:


On 27 November 2017 at 16:54, <agrayson2...@gmail.com <mailto:agrayson2...@gmail.com>> wrote:



    On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 5:48:58 AM UTC,
    agrays...@gmail.com <mailto:agrays...@gmail.com> wrote:



        On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 5:44:25 AM UTC, stathisp wrote:



            On 27 November 2017 at 16:25, <agrays...@gmail.com> wrote:



                On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 5:07:03 AM UTC,
                stathisp wrote:



                    On 26 November 2017 at 13:33,
                    <agrays...@gmail.com> wrote:

                        You keep ignoring the obvious 800 pound
                        gorilla in the room; introducing Many Worlds
                        creates hugely more complications than it
                        purports to do away with; multiple, indeed
                        infinite observers with the same memories and
                        life histories for example. Give me a break. AG


                    What about a single, infinite world in which
                    everything is duplicated to an arbitrary level of
                    detail, including the Earth and its inhabitants,
                    an infinite number of times? Is the bizarreness of
                    this idea an argument for a finite world, ending
                    perhaps at the limit of what we can see?


                    --stathis Papaioannou


                FWIW, in my view we live in huge, but finite,
                expanding hypersphere, meaning in any direction, if go
                far enough, you return to your starting position. Many
                cosmologists say it's flat and thus infinite; not
                asymptotically flat and therefore spatially finite.
                Measurements cannot distinguish the two possibilities.
                I don't buy the former since they also concede it is
                finite in age. A Multiverse might exist, and that
                would likely be infinite in space and time, with
                erupting BB universes, some like ours, most definitely
                not. Like I said, FWIW. AG


            OK, but is the *strangeness* of a multiverse with multiple
            copies of everything *in itself* an argument against it?

-- Stathis Papaioannou


        FWIW, I don't buy the claim that an infinite multiverse
        implies infinite copies of everything. Has anyone proved that? AG


    If there are uncountable possibilities for different universes,
    why should there be any repetitions? I don't think infinite
    repetitions has been proven, and I don't believe it. AG

If a finite subset of the universe has only a finite number of configurations and the Cosmological Principle is correct, then every finite subset should repeat. It might not; for example, from a radius of 10^100 m out it might be just be vacuum forever, or Donald Trump dolls.

If there is a repetition, is it really a different universe?  What happened to Leibniz's identity of indiscernibles?

Brent

--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to