More metaphysics
I posted this as a comment in Gillian K’s LJ, and I thought I might as well put it here, too:
I take the standpoint that reality is both fully determined (from an objective POV), and probabilistic (from an internal observer’s POV).
I think about this sort of thing a lot, too:
Our universe is so arbitrary that it is easier (ie, simpler and more elegant) for a multiverse to exist which contains it than for it to exist by itself.
The laws of QM suggest the existence of these universes as a continuation of the wavefunction beyond what we observe (ie, our universe is just one choice of slices among many in the whole multiverse).
Phenomena producing your current mental-state exist in infinitely many of these possible universes. By the whole identity of indiscernibles thing, since it is impossible to distinguish between these universes it is valid to say that you exist in all of them simultaneously.
This cloud of possible realities is unstable: your mind is a dynamic entity and so each change will cause a shift in the cloud. Each observation prunes away the universes which no longer fit (they contain differentiated versions of you, each of which has its own cloud — even the dead ones, which has the trivial, empty cloud).
(I would not be surprised if there is something about the nature of our consciousness that forces some sort of quantum-type interaction between elements of the cloud, and that this is what causes us to perceive a universe that obeys quantum laws, This is a kind of interesting kink on the weak anthropic principle.)
If you die in some universes, there will always have been alternatives in the cloud where you continue to exist. Since it is impossible to experience being dead, you will always experience continuity of consciousness.
Welcome to immortality. Please enjoy your stay.
I’ve decided not to read any more of your blatherings until you research it more directly and rigourously. (In other news I’ve no idea if I’ve spelled that correctly, and I rather enjoyed my use of the word “Blathering”)
Comment by hoose — January 26, 2007, 3:37 pm @ 3:37 pm
I’ve decided Gubbins is a better word.
Comment by hoosemaranium. — January 26, 2007, 6:05 pm @ 6:05 pm
“I take the standpoint that reality is both fully determined (from an objective POV), and probabilistic (from an internal observer’s POV).”
You could have saved Calvin so much time & effort.
Comment by Adrian — January 26, 2007, 10:49 pm @ 10:49 pm
Yeah: it’s amazing the trouble people get into simply because they try to hang on to a concept. Of course, if he’d ever met Hegel that might have helped, too.
Comment by Rosy — January 27, 2007, 12:14 am @ 12:14 am
kerfphwaffle is pretty good too.
Comment by hoosemaranium. — February 1, 2007, 1:06 pm @ 1:06 pm