RE: Spacetime/Inflation/Civilizations

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Thu Mar 06 2003 - 01:18:04 MST

  • Next message: Spudboy100@aol.com: "MicroGrid"

    Mike writes

    > Damien Broderick wrote:
    > > Hal wrote:
    > >
    > > > re-runs are particularly prone to philosophical
    > > > slippery-slope arguments where we blur the lines
    > > > between an "actual" re-run and what amounts to a
    > > > picture of one. I won't recap the arguments here,
    > > > they have been discussed ad infinitum in the archives.
    > >
    > > Ah, but are the archived arguments an "actual" re-run
    > > or what amounts to a picture of one?
    >
    > By definition, an archive is a picture of an argument, not an actual
    > argument in action. Of course, this post is an archive of my argument,
    > and not the actual argument itself (good thing you can't hear me
    > ranting at the CRT!).

    That is exactly correct Mike. It's even true if Damien
    were to write a fifteen-volume novel describing you
    ranting behind your terminal in chapters 23-1506 (Vol II-
    Vol XIV).

    > I suppose any email exchange is merely an
    > exchange/distribution of archived arguments.... If so, did we ever
    > really have a discussion, or do we just remember that we did?

    Oh, we really did, of that I can absolutely assure you.
    Because even if in the set of Earths that develop a lot
    of emulations of us thrashing this out, and even if
    those simulations were pure fiction (nothing had ever
    happened in the Hubble volume X where the emulation is
    taking place), there are still infinitely many worlds
    where it all *did* happen.

    > If you can't rant at your opponent in person, does a debate ever really
    > take place, or is it merely a plenum of possible quantum world paths?

    I think that David Deutsch would say that they're the same thing.

    > In a MWI metaverse, do all possible participants each argue every
    > possible argument to every possible point of contention,

    Of course! It's only a matter of density over the worlds.
    Very rare arguments (e.g., the ones you lose, like this one)
    have a very low density ;-)

    > or does it merely seem so from the amount of list traffic
    > (ah, there is where the signal to noise ratio comes from!)...?

    Aw, you've just been funnin' with me. I got to lighten up here.

    Lee



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 06 2003 - 01:16:57 MST