Dear Bruno, Does there really need to be a single level of the UD? What is the UD is intersecting with itself an infinite number of times? Is there a relationship. maybe an isomorphism, between the UD and the set of Godel numbers of the UD? After all, there does not exist a unique universal Godel code for the UD, no?
On Friday, December 20, 2013 12:08:46 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal 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]<javascript:> > > 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] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> >> . >> 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] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> >> . >> 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] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> > . > 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.
