Proposition 8, "effect", "noise", "nesting"

2002-10-11 Thread H J Ruhl
Proposition 8: The dynamic of Proposition 5 is random. Proof: Same form of proof as for Proposition 5. "Effect": I tried here to select a word that encompassed a sufficiently wide range of influences so that in the end the Everything summed up to no net information. One type of influence bet

Re: Many Fermis Interpretation Paradox -- So why aren't they here?

2002-10-11 Thread George Levy
Saibal Mitra wrote: > >Suppose you are a virtual person, programmed by me and living in a virtual >environment. You do some experiments to find the laws of physics. You try to >break up things and look what they are ``made of´´. Would you ever discover >how the pentium processor works if you pr

Re: Many Fermis Interpretation Paradox -- So why aren't they here?

2002-10-11 Thread Saibal Mitra
You can still have realism, but it must be the case that at least some of the things we think of as ``real physical objects´´ like e.g. electrons are not real. Suppose you are a virtual person, programmed by me and living in a virtual environment. You do some experiments to find the laws of physi

Re: My model presented more traditionally

2002-10-11 Thread jamikes
Dear Hal, thank you for your post. I will study your points before I can say Yeah or Nah to any one of them. It seems I have to make up your mind whether the "everything includes itself" means an infinite succession of an increasing line of 'evrythings', all including the previous one, or is it a