[extropy-chat] Simulation Argument critique

[rick]

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>Imagine an infinite space one inch by one inch by infinity.  Now
imagine a space twice as large, one inch by two inches by infinity.
Despite complaints about comparing infinities, it seems obvious that the
second object can hold exactly two of the smaller objects. When
comparing similar magnitudes or dimensions of infinities, it is possible
to do math and compare them.
/>

Many things will/do seem obvious to many people. So called common sense
has many times lead to error. My sense reckons that one infinite three
dimensional space is volumetrically equivalent to any other infinite
three dimensional space. And, I suggest that most math PhD's may
agree??? But this paradox may only be the result of our having imagined
the existence of a concept which lacks any physical referent. We have
little or no evidence that anything can be infinite -- not if we accept
the big bang. 

RE: the simulation conjecture: You'll just have to trust me on this one,
but when I designed and built the system which implements the simulation
that is currently running I only implemented a handful of sentient
players -- myself, and a few of the other entities on this list (you
each know who you are). So, the simulation only has to generate the
sensory inputs and minds of we few -- a very small computational task
indeed. I would tell the rest of you that you don't exist except as
artificially intelligent sounding boards which lack self awareness but,
of course, none of the rest of you exists to hear me :) 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Woolley, Certified Scientist Type, Confirmed Atheist, radical
thinker, notorious fuck-up, and self-proclaimed singular authority on
the abysmal depths of human stupidity that only we few lack. Happy
Happy, Joy Joy. http://home.centurytel.net/rickw aperick at centurytel.net