[~ot] why is programming so fun?

Georg Wrede georg at nospam.org
Sat Jun 7 06:27:32 PDT 2008


Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> Russell Lewis Wrote:
>> To be slightly more direct, the infinite universes hypothesis, 
>> combined with the anthropic principle, is a handy tool to explain 
>> away any evidence that doesn't fit your preconceptions. 

Yes. Combine utter crap (the former) with an ignorant, self-centered 
view (the latter), and you can (or may I even say, this forces you) to 
become embottled in your particular view. (!! "you" used here as the 
general person, not Simen or Russell.)

>> Any remarkable observation can be claimed to be random chance.
> 
> Ah, but here I believe you misunderstand things. "Every /possible/ 
> universe" does not mean "every /imaginable/ universe". 
...
> What many-worlds and it's derivatives preach is that all possible 
> results of a wavefunction collapse will take place, each in a 
> separate universe. The fact that the underlying laws that govern it 
> may change, does not allow matter and energy in a universe to break 
> those laws.

Many-worlds, IMHO, has come from thinking of wave function collapse the 
same day one tried to understand the universe. An unfortunate and 
unfounded "aha", and one immediately "discovers" Many Universes. If this 
person happens to have a good education in cosmology and math, then 
obviously his writings about this are accessible to fewer critics, and 
for anyone much harder to shoot down than those of a layman.

Of course, in general, intelligent people or intelligent actions have as 
a hallmark combining seemingly (to the lesser audience, anyway) 
unrelated things or ideas, and then making something excellent from it.

But the many-worlds thing is just a sorry stab at emulating such.



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list