[ExI] Public draft of my book 'Tales of the Turing Church

John Clark johnkclark at gmail.com
Sun Oct 21 23:03:45 UTC 2018

On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 4:44 PM Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:\

> > *the Copenhagen interpretation with its emphasis on consciousness*

That's one reason I don't like Copenhagen. You have to give this to the
MWI, it gives a complete explanation for quantum weirdness; that
explanation may or may not turn out to be correct but at least it's
complete in a way that Copenhagen is not. Copenhagen says nothing about
what consciousness is or how it works, the MWI doesn't either but unlike
Copenhagen it doesn't need to because consciousness has nothing to do with
the MWI. Also you can't think about cosmology if Copenhagen is in your
head, or at least you can't if you're thinking about the universe when it
was very young and very very small, but you can with the MWI.

And so I'd have to say that today the MWI is the least bad explanation of
quantum weirdness, but for all I know somebody could find a better one

> > *puts it* [Copenhagen] *in opposition with realism and thereby makes it
> supportive of the Simulation Argument.*

If we live in a simulation and the simulation programmers write efficient
code then the moon does not exist when we're not looking at it, but
something still does, the simulation programmers and their computer. If
realism is untrue then NOTHING exists when we're not looking at it.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20181021/4fadaf80/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list