On 4/21/05, Robert J. Chassell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maru wrote:
>     Wait, wasn't Tipler's argument basically given certain physical
>     constraints, we would surely be re-incarnated at the end of the
>     Universe? ...
> 
> How would we be re-incarnated?  And if you think we will be, how do
> you know we are not already in a re-incarnation, presuming there could
> be more than one?
> 
> As far as I can see a good re-incarnation is indistinguishable from
> the original; and if there are more than one, then probabilistically
> speaking, we are in a re-incarnation, not the original.
> 
> >From inside, how would you distinguish between the original and a
> re-incarnation?
> 
> >From inside a re-incarnation, how would you distinguish between one
> that is not caused by some entity and one that is?
> 
> --
>     Robert J. Chassell

Well, according to Tipler, assuming that the Universe was closed and
would collapse to a point in a Big Crunch, that would drive
energy/mass densities asymtoptically to infinity, as all the
Universe's mass collapsed to that point, and a suitably set up
superintelligence would be able to use that collapse to get
essentially infinite computing power, with which it would be trivial
to recreate the past, (or all possible pasts) thusly reincarnating us.
 That being a true incarnation is dependent on the Strong AI
postulate, and on perfect emulations being the same as the thing being
emulated.

I think,  I am not a physicist, and having never read Tipler's books,
I probably got something wrong there. Well, that's the How. As to the
whether, If any of Tipler's axioms are experimentally disproven, well,
there you go, that's how I know that is not our current situation.
(IMHO the universe is definitely looking open to me, which of course
falsifies the whole chain of reasoning.)

And from the inside, if you could get good reason to believe that you
are in one (aside from any anthropic reasoning), then that is not a
very good reincarnation/simulation. Which makes them so hard to
usefully think about.

>From inside a re-incarnation, how would you distinguish between one
> that is not caused by some entity and one that is?

What do you mean by this?

~Maru
http://www.simulation-argument.com/
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to