I love the Anthropic Principle. I find it fun that it does get lots of
criticism – but always emotional.

How could the first self-replicating molecule form? What if the smallest
possible chain of amino acids that can replicate turns out to be 1000
base-pairs long? That would mean the chances of something like that
happening would be at least 4 ^ 1000.

In the Anthropic Multiverse, it doesn’t matter how long the shortest
self-replicating molecule is. As long as it is possible, there’s a 100%
chance that it exists in one of the branches of the multiverse tree – and
there we are!

If you don’t like that argument, then you’ll hate these more:

(1) Consciousness is that which “sees” only one universe. A particle is not
conscious. Therefore it sees all universes simultaneously. A Zen Master
becomes “one” with the universe by meditation. The “enlightenment” is the
least conscious state that one can be in without actually being unconscious.
He’s trying to experience what it would be like to be a rock. It might
explain “near death” experiences as well as suicide bombers.

(2) The universe must exist. Proof: If it didn’t, we wouldn’t be here to
argue. Because we are here, “nothing” is impossible. Daddy, why does the
universe exist? Because, it’s impossible for it not to exist!

(3) You’ll never experience your own death. Others will experience your
death, but not you. Schrodinger’s Cat never dies from its own experience. At
every tick of your life’s clock, there is a chance that you will die and
non-zero chance that you won’t. Therefore, according to your own experience,
you will life forever. The chance of us celebrating Lazarus 2000th birthday
is ridiculously small but still positive. This explains why we have no
record of anyone that old. But the chance that you will experience your next
birthday, no matter how old you are, is 100% 

(4) If you attempt to commit suicide by jumping off a cliff, there’s always
a small chance you will survive (botch it up, chicken out, or miracles), and
that is the universe you will be conscious in. It doesn’t mean you will not
be crippled for many years to come. I do not have the bravery (nor the
philosophy) to step in the stream of a machine gun firing, but I suspect
that if I do, the gun will jam immediately. All soldiers return alive and
well from war, just in different universes.

(5) Hugh Everett (who invented the “many world” theory) has a daughter named
Elizabeth who committed suicide. She left a note that said she was going to
another universe to be with her father. This freakishness now makes more
sense than it should!

 

“One nation under God”. When you consider all the butterfly effects
throughout history and just how improbable your existence is, you realize
that everyone who is alive is astronomically lucky, regardless of any
outsider’s pity. You might consider yourself luckier than someone born in a
communist regime, but that’s because you only see the relative luck and
ignore the common luck you both share. You both have 10e1000000… whatever
chance of existing plus you alone have an additional 1 in 30 additional
chance of being fortunate to live in America. You are focusing on the small
number you have that your comrade lacks, but are ignoring the other far
bigger number you both share.

 

I’d rather be tortured for 100 years than commit suicide now. Lucky, I have
a third choice.

 

Rob

 

From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 1:52 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] particles have free will

 

But even with the (a?) multiverse theory, doesn't one have to (get to?)
contemplate just how they came to be a singular identity/experiencer in a
multitude of possibilities?   I find variations on multiverse cosmology
quite compelling from a theoretical/symmetric/completeness point of view.
In particular I find Lee Smolin's variations quite compelling at many
levels.  But if anything, it leaves me wondering (still, yet more,  not
less) about the experience of identity and free will that I have.  The
closest thing I have to offer is a variation of the Anthropic Principle
wherein the parts of the multi-verse continuum where "object-like-phenomena"
exist, and where the "object-like-patterns" have complex enough organization
to include "self-organization" and "emergent organization", and where within
those forms of organization there is sufficient (qualitatively as well as
quantitatively?) complexity to support patterns which are in some sense
recursive (patterns that have sub-patterns of themselves within them?).

In these "regions" of the "multiverse continuum", there are recursive
patterns which have the essential properties which I am calling
self-awareness.   Other regions of the multiverse continuum don't have these
patterns so there is no "pattern" akin to an "I" contemplating "itself".

It is a bit resonant with my experience the day in 3rd grade when I quit
mumbling the words "one nation under god" during our daily "prayer" (pledge
of allegience).  The trivial amount of social studies I'd been taught (that
the Soviet Union was a *bad* form of government and way of life, but the
*people* were just like us) left me to wonder how *I* got so lucky to be
born an Amerikun (impose image of Captain America Character) while so many
were so unlucky as to have been born Pinko Commie Losers (insert a different
image of your choice, preferably degrading and humiliating and easy to
dismiss). 

I think I need another drink.  Or a nap.  Or ....  maybe I should go back to
my studies of Fredkin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Fredkin)

Free the Particles!  Enslave the Waves!

- Steve

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to