### Stat-meta chat on plastic with Marduk-kur.

For the first entry on statistical metaphysics, here's a conversation I had with Marduk-kur over on plastic:

Hey, Marduk, why don't you try and take my testable theory on? It's approximately infinitely more interesting than these old debates. I'm calling it Statistical Metaphysics right now, although I'm having second thoughts on the about using the word metaphysics — as an atheist physicist I think it has a clear connotation of the mathematical foundations of physics (and thus reality), but the more I read about it on the web, the more I see it associated with all sorts of supernatural flimflam. Anyways, not important. Here's a new rough draft of the paper I'm working on, and I'm also presenting it this Saturday the 7th at Transvision 2004 in Toronto. Here's a quick review of the theory:

First, it is possible to create a complete mathematical model of the universe (perhaps something like string theory...). Then, since we observers are just permutations of atoms within our universe and give it no special status, one argues that all mathematical structures exist — call this collection the ensemble. This then helps to explain the apparent 'fine tuning' of our universe as to allow for life — i.e. it isn't tuned and there probably isn't any life in much of the rest of the ensemble. Still this begs the (non-intuitive and nonobvious) question of why we find ourselves to be observers at all. This question is put in sharper contrast when we ask what it is to be a conscious being. To point, all of one's conscious experiences are the patterns of firing neurons within the brain, i.e. essentially a giant, abstract connected graph (or an abstract structure of objects and their relationships -ASORs- as I like to call them). Indeed everything else in the ensemble can also be placed in this connected graph/ASOR representation. So why is it that we find ourselves to be in the 'evolving-observer' subset of ASORs within the ensemble? Inspired by the success of statistical mechanics in explaining which types of macroscopic structures exist within the universal wave function (i.e. all permutations of atoms exist, but some classes of permutations are extremely more common than others, like those that follow the 2nd law...), I argue simply that observers form the largest subset in the ensemble — there are fundamentally more permutations of observers than any other type of information. For this to be true it requires that observers can grow to be infinitely complex in the limit of infinite time, which in turn requires that there is no absolute finite upper limit to the power of computers that we can build, which itself requires that there is no final theory of physics (instead each physical theory turns out to be only a local approximation of a more complex theory...). If this is true, then observers essentially become the power set of the ensemble, extracting up to an infinite number of unique pieces of information from their environments. This in turn means that the infinite number of permutations of these infinitely complex observers is of a higher cardinality than the number of permutations of all other ASORs in the ensemble, which is why what it is to exist is to be one of these observers evolving in time.

Hey, Marduk, why don't you try and take my testable theory on? It's approximately infinitely more interesting than these old debates. I'm calling it Statistical Metaphysics right now, although I'm having second thoughts on the about using the word metaphysics — as an atheist physicist I think it has a clear connotation of the mathematical foundations of physics (and thus reality), but the more I read about it on the web, the more I see it associated with all sorts of supernatural flimflam. Anyways, not important. Here's a new rough draft of the paper I'm working on, and I'm also presenting it this Saturday the 7th at Transvision 2004 in Toronto. Here's a quick review of the theory:

First, it is possible to create a complete mathematical model of the universe (perhaps something like string theory...). Then, since we observers are just permutations of atoms within our universe and give it no special status, one argues that all mathematical structures exist — call this collection the ensemble. This then helps to explain the apparent 'fine tuning' of our universe as to allow for life — i.e. it isn't tuned and there probably isn't any life in much of the rest of the ensemble. Still this begs the (non-intuitive and nonobvious) question of why we find ourselves to be observers at all. This question is put in sharper contrast when we ask what it is to be a conscious being. To point, all of one's conscious experiences are the patterns of firing neurons within the brain, i.e. essentially a giant, abstract connected graph (or an abstract structure of objects and their relationships -ASORs- as I like to call them). Indeed everything else in the ensemble can also be placed in this connected graph/ASOR representation. So why is it that we find ourselves to be in the 'evolving-observer' subset of ASORs within the ensemble? Inspired by the success of statistical mechanics in explaining which types of macroscopic structures exist within the universal wave function (i.e. all permutations of atoms exist, but some classes of permutations are extremely more common than others, like those that follow the 2nd law...), I argue simply that observers form the largest subset in the ensemble — there are fundamentally more permutations of observers than any other type of information. For this to be true it requires that observers can grow to be infinitely complex in the limit of infinite time, which in turn requires that there is no absolute finite upper limit to the power of computers that we can build, which itself requires that there is no final theory of physics (instead each physical theory turns out to be only a local approximation of a more complex theory...). If this is true, then observers essentially become the power set of the ensemble, extracting up to an infinite number of unique pieces of information from their environments. This in turn means that the infinite number of permutations of these infinitely complex observers is of a higher cardinality than the number of permutations of all other ASORs in the ensemble, which is why what it is to exist is to be one of these observers evolving in time.

## 5 Comments:

Hi! My name is Matt, and I love your BlogSpot! I am curious…May I publish your blog on my spot known as “Best of Da Blogz”. I want to showcase your great work and make sure that your get ALL of the credit for your creativity and genius. I even want to put your website below your post. Therefore, if others would like to learn more about you and see how great you really are…They Can! So would this be possible? Please let me know and I greatly appreciate your time. Best wishes! Ciao!

Da Site:

http://dablogspots.blogspot.com/

~Matt :)

Feeling lonely? Hook up with Real Singles now for $4.99 to connect, and only $0.99 a min. A true match is only a phone call away. Give it a try 1-800-211-9293.

I read over your blog, and i found it inquisitive, you may find My Blog interesting. My blog is just about my day to day life, as a park ranger. So please Click Here To Read My Blog

Joy in warcraft leveling living comes wow lvl from having wow lvl fine emotions,wow power level trusting them,power leveling giving them power leveling the freedom of wrath of the lich king power leveling a bird in the open.wlk power leveling Joy in living can age of conan gold never be assumed as a pose,or put on from guildwars gold the outside as a mask. People who have this joy don not need maple story mesos to talk about it; they radiate it. wow gold They just live out their joy and let wow power leveling it splash its sunlight and glow into other lives as naturally as bird sings.

Buy Generic Cialis Online For Full Customer Satisfaction. Order Cheap Cialis Prescription or Buy Tadalafil at the Best Prices from 8pills.com.

Online Pharmacy | Buy Viagra | Buy Tramadol | Buy Cialis | Buy Fioricet | Buy Ultram | Buy Soma | Buy Tamiflu | Buy Levitra

Post a Comment

<< Home