From: Michael S. Lorrey (retroman@turbont.net)
Date: Thu Oct 26 2000 - 08:51:35 MDT
Nick Bostrom wrote:
>
> >universe among the ensemble. However White objects to the supposition that
> >that
> >one such tuned universe is the one we happen to be in as a result of that
> >tossing. Your demolition of this argument in respect to life bearing universes
> >due to the IF..THEN..ELSE nature of quantum mechanics is rather good, but
> >may or
>
> I'm don't understand you here. My criticism of the White objection to the
> argument from fine-tuning to the multiverse hypothesis is that White
> operates with an erroneous model of how observational selection effects
> work. With a correct model, his argument can be seen to be invalid.
> Fine-tuning does provide some evidence for the multiverse hypothesis. But
> quantum mechanics does not enter into this argument.
You said that information about other universes is communicated by the very act
of differentiation if the split between one universe and another is the matter
of a photon flipping one way and not the other. If universe A is the way it is
because Photon P flipped right, that universe knows that universe B is the way
it is because Photon P flipped left (and vice versa). If every universe retains
knowledge about how every quantum decision flipped in its own history, it has
knowledge about every other universe that spun off from it in the past. We can
then apply this to Fermi's Paradox, and infer that if intelligent species come
in contact, due to the temporal offset probabilities, every intelligent species
has been influenced by every intelligent species that has come in contact with
its world or solar system in the past to at least some small degree. The two
species do not neccessarily need to come into concious communication for one to
influence the other. See what I mean (or what you mean, as the case may be)?
What Fermi assumes is that every intelligent species will always overrun and
wipe out native biota on every world they come in contact with, and will build
and abandon structures that retain some evidence of intelligent influence for
many millenia, and it is only under these assumptions that his paradox is a
problem. Thus Fermi falls for the mistake of Brittannus, who as Ceasar comments,
"Mistakes the habits and customs of his tribe for the laws of nature."
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:44 MST