But it illustrates a point: Objectively, there seem to be no hard rules to be violated. I have a hard time justifying a four-sided triangle, but it presumes that three is not identical to four. Pretty obvious, but is that true given no rules at all? — noAxioms
So if all these outcomes exist, why do empirical measurements find more occurrences of the probable ones than the improbable ones? — noAxioms
The other solution is that some realities are more probable than others, and in the case of your proposed view, it means some things are more logically consistent than other things. This world exists more than the possible but more improbable ones. — noAxioms
I think the decay case can be swept under the rug saying there are infinite, but as many universes on one side of the half life as on the other. Mathematics supports at least that since all the positive reals (or rationals for that matter) on one side of any arbitrary division can be mapped to the reals on the other side. There are more little numbers than big ones, in that sense.I don't know what it would mean that some things are more logically consistent than others. — litewave
It can't mean that there are 4 of one world and 1 of the other, since four of them would be identical, and thus violate the law of identity. — noAxioms
Worlds have positions?? Can I say which is left of the other? Can these four identical worlds be put in some kind of order?You can have copies of a world that are the same as that world. Their only difference would be their different position (place) in reality. — litewave
Worlds have positions?? Can I say which is left of the other? Can these four identical worlds be put in some kind of order?
You're assigning nonexistent differences to the same thing and contradicting your own definitions now. — noAxioms
Worlds have positions?? Can I say which is left of the other? Can these four identical worlds be put in some kind of order? — noAxioms
Physical space has no coordinate system except an arbitrary one assigned in an abstract way. Physical space sans matter is not space at all since matter defines it. One can define an abstract empty coordinate system with no objects in it, but our universe seems not based on such geometry.A space can consist of identical points, that is, points that are the same except for their position in the space they make up. — litewave
Of some kind, yes. But the spatial relation that exists between the Earth and the Moon is not it, nor is it the temporal relation between an ice cube and that cube melted an hour later. Both those relations can be measured in linear terms and thus can be assigned meaningful coordinates. The relation between Earth and the Earth with the unicorns is not expressible in linear terms. It is a different kind of separation, not one that can be ordered or have distances like spatial and temporal relations.If the worlds are supposed to exist in the same reality, and they are numerically distinct (despite having the same qualitative properties) from one another then I cannot see how that makes sense without saying that they occupy different regions of some kind. — Mr Bee
Of some kind, yes. But the spatial relation that exists between the Earth and the Moon is not it, nor is it the temporal relation between an ice cube and that cube melted an hour later. — noAxioms
So maybe our answer lies in here somewhere. The sides of the square are identical, and thus are one side, but it exists four times as much as center point of the thing. — noAxioms
I didn't say it wasn't a physical world. I said the relationship between this world and another one is neither temporal nor spatial. It can be said that exists in an alternate dimension, but that dimension is not of space, which nor is it a linear dimension at all. Linear dimensions can be measured and the events along them have the property of being ordered. Alternate worlds are actually still physically part of each other, sharing common events that lay outside the light cone of the quantum decoherence event that separated them. So if I perform some experiment that measures a decay and potentially kills a cat based on it, both the dead cat and the live one share the same Mars, at least for a while. Schrodinger's theoretical box prevented that light cone, and thus the two cats also shared a common Schrodinger, which is why it is meaningful to assert that the cat is both dead and alive.[a relationship] Of some kind, yes. But the spatial relation that exists between the Earth and the Moon is not it, nor is it the temporal relation between an ice cube and that cube melted an hour later.
— noAxioms
Is it? We are talking about something related to physics which means we are dealing with something physical here. So it seems closer to say that these worlds, if they should exist, exist within a physical space rather than say the space of abstract ideas (not a Platonist myself or anything but I'm just saying). These parallel worlds could be said to exist in another dimension of space for instance, and not necessarily the dimensions that we are normally accustomed to either. — Mr Bee
My gripe was this violated the definition of identical. Worlds do not have coordinates, not even arbitrarily assigned abstract ones like you have with respect for space. They're quite identical and are not in different places.Or we can say that one abstract line is instantiated in four particular lines. The abstract line and the four particular lines are five different things. — litewave
I didn't say it wasn't a physical world. I said the relationship between this world and another one is neither temporal nor spatial. — noAxioms
Every example above is a linear case. Complex numbers have magnitude and can be meaningfully added and subtracted from each other. I can add and subtract demand or price and say there is more demand for this than that.I would say that any things that are differentiated from each other make up a "space" of some kind, in which they are differentiated from each other. So you could have a one-dimensional space of natural numbers, or a two-dimensional space of complex numbers, or a space where on one axis is the price of a product and on another axis is the demanded quantity of the product (the demand curve can be said to exist in such a space). — litewave
This is better. No addition or subtraction is meaningful between two members. I didn't say space, but I said 'spatial'. The latter is a linear thing. Hilbert space is not linear, so 'space' is a more general term like this multiset, a term I had not heard before.Or if you don't want to use the word "space" in such a general sense, just use the word "collection", "set" or a "multiset". Multisets are sets that treat identical copies of their members as different objects.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.