Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: What triggers new universes

Expand Messages
  • martin clark
    ... Quantum physics..anyway..is some sort of better view of whatever reality really is insofar as its a more logical kind of extension than the obsrver
    Message 1 of 287 , Jul 1 1:52 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      >> if there were laws of physics then that implies a finite number of
      >> laws ..so what would be the logic of this finite number of laws
      >> governing a system of infinite paralell universes? ..if that were
      >> all the case ..it would seem strange indeed.Hence there can be
      >> no true 'LAWS OF PHYSICS' ....ALL appearing that way is apparent
      >> and dependant on the viewer,as always.
      >
      > MWI says there is one set of laws of physics governing the
      > multiverse, which is much larger than a classical universe.


      Quantum physics..anyway..is some sort of better view of whatever reality 'really is' insofar as its a more logical kind of extension than the obsrver viewpoint s of relativity.In it all reality is a measurement subjective observer focussed thing.Appearance of 'physical laws' in the system is in some way a by product of the human minds interaction with the system.Literal existence of a finite no of equations that form a complete description of the system ...seems a really long shot to believe.

      Marty
    • Kim Jones
      There is also the singular phenomenon called neuroplasticity which means the brain can change its own constitution when and as it needs to. Not sure whether
      Message 287 of 287 , Sep 2, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        There is also the singular phenomenon called "neuroplasticity" which means the brain can change its own constitution when and as it needs to. Not sure whether NP exists in creatures other than mammals, but monkeys and humans definitely have it. It's taking a while, but people are starting to wake up to the significance of this. Perhaps induction need not be as slow as all that. Perhaps the real challenge is to educate people with the concept of neuroplasticity in mind; of the brain's specific capability of producing what would appear to be almost Lamarckian adaptations to reality; of the brain's ability to above all LEARN and to do that, it has to be able to change itself continually. What else does that?

        Kim Jones






        On 25/08/2011, at 11:48 PM, John Clark wrote:

        > The Scientific Method is much less error prone than induction but
        > unfortunately it is also much slower and MUCH more difficult to implement;
        > for science you need a very recent invention, you need a brain and a good
        > one that has been properly educated, while insects have been successfully
        > performing induction for many hundreds of millions of years. Neither the
        > Scientific Method nor explanations in general made any impact whatsoever on
        > this planet in its entire 4.5 billion year history until just a few thousand
        > years ago. In fact, unless ET exists (and if he does its very mysterious why
        > that fact isn't obvious) then explanations and the Scientific Method made no
        > impact on this universe in its 13.7 billion year history until very very
        > recently; and yet complex and interesting things, like life and eventually
        > brains, got built.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.