Bruno:  In that case a multiverse could contain another multiverse, a bit
like a black hole could be a door to another universe.

Richard: I like that idea because Smolin hypothized and Poplawski confirmed
using GR + spin that black holes yield at least an internal universe.



On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:

> Richard,
>
>
> On 20 Dec 2013, at 12:40, Richard Ruquist wrote:
>
> What surprises me is that apparently comp predicts a single multiverse
> rather than than multiple multiverses.
>
>
> Interesting problem.
>
> Comp predicts only a single multi-dreams, which is the "universal"
> computation made by the UD, or the Sigma_1 complete part of arithmetic.
> I am still not sure if the "material points of view" will give 0, 1, 2,
> ... aleph_0, ... or more multiverses.
>
> A difficulty relies also in the fact that a "multiverse", or even a
> "physical universe" is still not really well defined by the physicists
> themselves. In fact in Everett theory, we might also not be entirely sure
> if there is a multiverse, or a multi-multiverse, and such question might
> need the resolution of the quantum gravity question.
>
> With comp, we can say things like that: IF there are n multiverses, THEN
> they cannot interfere statistically and so "you" are in only one of them
> (if not they will comp-interfere), and thus they must be all "small"  (=
> not emulating a UD). So, only one multiverse might contain a "physical"
> universal dovetailing.
> Is the quantum vacuum a physical universal dovetailer?
> Is the Everett universal wave a physical universal dovetailer?
> Is the solution of the comp measure problem a physical universal
> dovetailer? Should "nature" compete with the universal dovetailing to win
> the measure competition?
>
> Ah! You make me thinking ... What is really a multiverse? Can we define
> this in ZF, or in ZF+kappa? Would it makes sense to talk  of
> alpha-multi-verse for alpha an arbitrary cardinal, or an On-multiverse,
> with On being the class of all cardinals?
> What if the ultimate structure of the physical reality is non well
> founded? That is plausible with comp (despite arithmetic is well founded).
> In that case a multiverse could contain another multiverse, a bit like a
> black hole could be a door to another universe.
>
> Keep in mind that for a computationalist (who is aware of the UDA
> "reversal") (assuming there is no flaw of course) the physical reality is
> the border of the "real" reality where "real" is what the FPI gives for the
> "average" universal (and Löbian) numbers.
>
> You can visualized the UD by a cone of length omega (aleph_zero). Just
> take a program for a UD implemented in a universal game of life pattern.
> Then pile up the planes representing the successive evolving life pattern.
> This gives a digital cone (due to the never ending growing of the life
> pattern emulating the UD), and you can "see" the UD* as an infinite
> tridimensional digital cone. OK?
>
> Now, you can compactify that structure. You identify the planes  at 0, 1,
> 2, 3, ... n, places in the infinite piling with 0, 1/2,
> 1/2+1/4, 1/2+1/4+1/8, ..., so that the entire infinite UD* is kept on a
> finite board of lenght 1: just a cone, or its projection: a triangle. OK?
>
> Where is the "physical reality" in that picture? Nowhere, as UD* is purely
> 3p, and physics is purely 1p. Hopefully: 1p-plural (and Everett confirms
> this: our computations are contagious, we cannot *not* share them when
> interacting. But that 1p collective structure must (in comp) emerge at the
> union of all sets of all computations (containing our actual states), and
> this can be described in 3p, and is in the border which appears when we do
> the compactification.
>
> That border, the topside of the cone, or the right side of the triangle of
> length 1, is an hologram, as each sub-branch infinitely often generates the
> UD, and the broder contains the infinite one. It is a bit like the border
> (but on dimension 1) of the Mandelbrot set. The physical realities are
> dense everywhere "there" and they are multiplied in hard to conceive
> magnitude, on that 2-dimensional top (in that representation of UD*).
> Unlike the little mandelbrot sets, they might be non enumerable.
>
> And then you have that things which I tended to hide a little bit, which
> is that the hypostases gives three quantizations, like if there where three
> type of physical realities (would that mean three multiverses? In *some*
> sense to make precise: perhaps).
> Not just sensible matter and intelligible matter (Bp & Dt & p, and Bp &
> Dt, respectively) provides quantization, on the p sigma_1, the soul (Bp &
> p) does too, on the p sigma_1. Apparently Plotinus is right on this: the
> soul seems to be born with a foot already in matter.
>
> I should say more on modal logic and enunciate the theorem of Solovay. All
> what I say comes from the fact that meta-arithmetic can be arithmetized,
> the main discovery of Gödel. It is the technic which embeds the
> "mathematician" in the mathematical reality (indeed in a tiny arithmetical
> part), like Everett embeds the physicist in the physical reality (defined
> by a solution of the SWE).
> It is the technic which makes able to interview, and sum up infinite
> interviews with the machine talking about itself.
>
> Monistic theories cannot not embed the observer in the observed, the
> spectator in the spectacle, the audience in the show.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
> Richard
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:26 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 20 Dec 2013, at 02:15, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it
>> funny? Is math surprised that its math?
>>
>>
>> It is of course only surprising for those deluded (assuming comp) into
>> thinking that there is some primitive non mathematical reality, like the
>> aristotelian theologian, who believe in a non mathematical primitively
>> physical universe.
>>
>> The real surprise, in the arithmetic internal views,  is the existence of
>> the universe (not the fact that it is not a primitive).
>>
>> The absence of X, if proved, would surprise the believers in X, in a same
>> way.
>>
>> "Surprised" is prejudice dependent.
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 2:07:47 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
>>>
>>>  http://abstrusegoose.com/544
>>>
>>> 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 [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> 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 [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> 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 [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> 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 [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> 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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to