[ExI] Future and past was Many Worlds

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Jan 10, 2008 7:46 PM, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
>
> On 1/10/08, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 9, 2008 10:14 AM, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
> > > On 1/9/08, hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
> > > > At 09:22 PM 1/8/2008, Rafal wrote:
> > > > >On Jan 8, 2008 10:41 PM, hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the things which falls out is that the past is as uncertain as
> > > > > > the future.  I.e., *many* pasts could have contributed to the current
> > > > > > reality (whatever that happens to be).
> > > > >
> > > > >### I'd rather say, 1 << N(past) << N(future). The number of possible
> > > > >futures is much larger than the number of possible pasts, and both are
> > > > >unimaginably numerous.
> > > >
> > > > Time symmetry would argue for the number of past and future states to
> > > > be the same.  I don't think it is a good idea to go any further with
> > > > this line of thinking.
> > >
> > > I'm intrigued by Rafal's claim, but I come to the same symmetrical
> > > result as does Keith.
> > >
> > > I can imagine reasons why pursuing this topic might be demoralizing to
> > > some, but I don't see it as a "bad idea" to try to increase
> > > understanding of this.  Rafal, can you provide a rational
> > > justification for your claim?
> >
> > ### An increase of entropy in a system means that the description of
> > the state of the system requires more bits. A perfect crystal can be
> > described as multiple of its cell structure but the same matter
> > vaporized requires enumeration of relative positions of every atom.
> > The false vacuum which gave rise to all observable matter was a very
> > low entropy system that at sizes below Planck scale could be described
> > by just a small number of bits, and there were comparably few states
> > that are compatible with our present - yet today the same part of the
> > universe requires hundreds of orders of magnitude more information to
> > be described to the same degree of precision. As entropy increases,
> > the size of the universe grows, there will be even more possible
> > states. Thus, the number of possible past states is very small
> > (approaching 1 perhaps?) if you go close enough to the Big Bang, and
> > the number of possible futures will keep on increasing, for a very
> > long time if not indefinitely.
>
> During our previous discussion, which appeared to go all Platonic and
> shit ;-)   -- I mean, it started out pure as crystal and then went
> highly entropic --  I recommended to you the thinking of Hew Price and
> his book Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point [1].  It seems appropriate
> still.
>
> I don't necessarily disagree with your view here, but was hoping you
> could offer an encompassing resolution to the question.  I don't see
> that in your response, and I suspect that any "solution" that doesn't
> account for the inherently subjective nature of entropy will be found
> lacking.
>
### You credit me with too much insight if you expect to hear the Big
Answers from me :)

But, on the more modest issue raised here, whether the number of
possible futures is greater than the number of possible pasts, I think
I did acquit myself adequately. Whether subjective experience and
entropy share an arcane connection doesn't impact the claim that the
information content (measured in terms of most compact descriptions of
microstates) of the multiverse appears to increase with time.

Rafal