I feel sorry that I inspired this thread by my comment but did not elaborate it enough. Basically I have multilevel depositorium of wild ideas, with wildest are on the top. (I think I should make a map about it :)
So I peak an idea from the next level of the depositorium, not the wildest one, to help Eltan. As I know that it is wild idea I can’t take it for granted and I understand that it needs more profound explanation. As I write slowly on foreign language, I was hesitated to go for long explanation which will only spoil my carma afterwords.
Basically, my idea would be easy to explain using quantum multiverse hypothesis. The explanatory logic when could be ported to Dust theory.
Different minds have different probabilities to exist in multiverse.
When, IF there is a way to influence probabilities of existence, when minds able to do so will dominate. It is just another explanation for natural selection and evolutionary psychology, nothing new here.
If there is other ways to change distribution of minds in different branches of multiverse, some minds will use it and will dominate and most likely we are such type of minds. Or, simply speaking, if magic is physically possible, when such magic capable mids would dominate, so they will be an attractor in total multiverse mind space. (Again, if you see Bostrom’s UN++ article you could find rational explanation how a mind could manipulate probability of future reality by almost magical means but in fact using Doomsday argument).
It all depends of word “if”, so we can’t take it for granted.
I was speaking about it only to illustrate what is an attractor of minds in complex universe. Different complex universes has different mind attractors, for example, if time travel is possible, where will be constant loops as attractors.
Now we move to the topic. Suppose that many me-like-expirineces exist in different worlds. If I narrow my experience, it may exist in many more worlds. If I narrow it to a point, I could be almost everybody. When I open my eyes, and I become one of trillions different observers. Resulting process may be explained as jumping of consciousness from one observer to another.
Personally, I think it is not a problem at all, as after many jumps consciousness will return to original observer and it will not have observable consequences.
Lets assume for the sake of the argument that such jumping may happen.
This jumping of consciousness from one observer to another may be represented as a line in the set of all possible observers, and such line may go almost infinite and random until it meet an observer that somehow prevents its jumping—he will be an attractor. How he could do it? His consciousness must be more stable and each small part of it must be more firmly connected with other.
Now the things go wilder. We will evaluate human consciousness for these criteria. Human has almost constant dreaming during sleep time, and I suggested that it may prevent consciousness from loosing its exact correspondence to mostly human and “his” world. (But on the next level of wilderness we could remember that yogis deliberately tries to experience one point state. I had it once during dream. It like a become a point even without colors or difference between audio and video.)
Also humans have qualia that are uniform inside all visual field (which is strange in fact). So any small qualia, any green point is enough to firmly correspondent to all possible experiences and thus stabilise them against jumping.
I think that qualia are needed mostly to strictly stabilise worlds.
I understood that I went too far for rationalist forum, so I will stop with my speculations how qualia stabilise the world.
Resulting process may be explained as jumping of consciousness from one observer to another.
May it? DT and MWI don’t support the idea of consciousness that can detach itself and literally jump. Or if it is a metaphor, what is it a metaphor for?
Personally, I think it is not a problem at all, as after many jumps consciousness will return to original observer
Do you have any reason for believing that other than the inconvenience of the alternative?
I speak about DT and MWI in terms of opening post, where they need to explain more general theory which was named “flux universe”. Idea of flux universe is that things which are not inside your attention become blurred. The most well known example of blurred things us Shredinger cat. But in my opinion you do not need neither DT or MWI to get to flux reality. Because even in classical universe the same observers (copies) may exist in different circumstances. And if I deliberately exclude from my attention many things I will become equal to many other observers, thus changing size of my reference class.
If there is other ways to change distribution of minds in different branches of multiverse, some minds will use it and will dominate and most likely we are such type of minds. Or, simply speaking, if magic is physically possible, when such magic capable mids would dominate, so they will be an attractor in total multiverse mind space.
I have no idea why you think this is the case. How would “magic-capable minds” dominate Mind Space? What even is magic? I read Bostrom’s UN++ paper and I do not understand how it is used in your logic.
Personally, I think it is not a problem at all, as after many jumps consciousness will return to original observer and it will not have observable consequences.
Well, that’s where we will have to disagree.
This jumping of consciousness from one observer to another may be represented as a line in the set of all possible observers, and such line may go almost infinite and random until it meet an observer that somehow prevents its jumping—he will be an attractor. How he could do it? His consciousness must be more stable and each small part of it must be more firmly connected with other.
Yes, this is precisely my understanding of it.
(But on the next level of wilderness we could remember that yogis deliberately tries to experience one point state. I had it once during dream. It like a become a point even without colors or difference between audio and video.)
Also humans have qualia that are uniform inside all visual field (which is strange in fact). So any small qualia, any green point is enough to firmly correspondent to all possible experiences and thus stabilise them against jumping. I think that qualia are needed mostly to strictly stabilise worlds.
I’m afraid that I do not understand a single sentence here, and I can’t fathom how this has to do with magical powers.
I understood that I went too far for rationalist forum, so I will stop with my speculations how qualia stabilise the world.
No way, you’ve given far better answers than anyone else here.
Ok, first I will explain what do I mean using word “magic” here.
I define magic as an ability to influence probability of your own success by direct manipulation of probabilities, rather than simple fitting. In Bostrom article Adam and Eve manipulate probabilities of useful events by manipulating total number of observers in their universe.
Now is my claim: IF any magic is physically possible, when evolutionary process of natural selection has already use it. Because manipulating of probabilities of success of your offsprings will give you strong evolutionary advantage. This magic may be very small, just 51 percent chance to get better genes in offspring and 49 per cent chance not to die in 50-50 situation.
This claim is not equal to the claim that any magic exist or any claims about possible mechanism of such magic.
But if evolutionary small magic exist, we could find its evidence studying theory and history of the evolution. Such evidence would be unprobable genetic mutations or evolutionary jumps. (But one of explanatory mechanism of such magic could be just anthropic principle—we could find our selves only on the worlds there evolution was quick enough to create intelligence). But even stronger mechanism of evolutionary magic is possible, and they are most likely connected with manipulating за branches probabilities in the quantum multiverse.
And here we come to stronger claim: If any magic is possible in any part of quantum multiverse and is using manipulating of amount of branches - when we are most likely in such part of the multiverse. Prove: if someone able manipulate ammount of branches, it most likely is about creating many new branches. Many here means astronomically more. So we are probably here, based on self-sampling assumption.
Ok, lets try to explain one-pont state in your own words. Basically, your personality model consists of pure attention part P, and memory part M1. If P moves away from M1, it can’t return back and could go to any M2, M3 and so on. Basically one point state is pure attention without any experience. In words of contemporary philosopher BENJ HELLIE it is just “sole pellet”. Somehow it is possible to feel pure attention, may be it is a situation when it starts to experience itself. (Or maybe it is only illusion). Some esoteric theories are concentrated about this ability, mostly Dzogchen school of TIbet Buddhism (rigpa conception). But in european rational tradition one may remember phenomenalogical reduction by Husserl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Husserl#The_elaboration_of_phenomenology
In Bostrom article Adam and Eve manipulate probabilities of useful events by manipulating total number of observers in their universe. Now is my claim: IF any magic is physically possible, when evolutionary process of natural selection has already use it. Because manipulating of probabilities of success of your offsprings will give you strong evolutionary advantage. This magic may be very small, just 51 percent chance to get better genes in offspring and 49 per cent chance not to die in 50-50 situation. This claim is not equal to the claim that any magic exist or any claims about possible mechanism of such magic.
Why? I think the mechanism has everything to do with it; can you think of any other way to perform ‘magic’ than Adam’s anthropic cheat? Besides, it wouldn’t even work- if he were being observed by us, we have no rational reason to believe that a wounded deer will come around, and we’d be right. It’s simply an anomaly brought about by Adam’s highly improbable perspective as the first of billions of observers.
Ok, lets try to explain one-pont state in your own words. Basically, your personality model consists of pure attention part P, and memory part M1. If P moves away from M1, it can’t return back and could go to any M2, M3 and so on. Basically one point state is pure attention without any experience. In words of contemporary philosopher BENJ HELLIE it is just “sole pellet”. Somehow it is possible to feel pure attention, may be it is a situation when it starts to experience itself. (Or maybe it is only illusion). Some esoteric theories are concentrated about this ability, mostly Dzogchen school of TIbet Buddhism (rigpa conception). But in european rational tradition one may remember phenomenalogical reduction by Husserl
OK, I think I have a better grasp now. But what are you arguing for? What’s the point?
I do not argue now, I just try to answer your questions. The final nature of reality is not known to me, but I have many interesting ideas. If our idea of reality is wrong it means that new existential risks exist. And may be new opportunities to prevent them.
Magic it self is not important, it is important that it require different nature of reality.
Now how to manipulate probabilities. For example I want to win in a lottery with chances 1 to 100. What I need to do so is a copy machine and external computer and MWI interpretation. I create 100 copies of me, and put them in sleep. Than external computer check result of the lottery and kill 99 sleeping copies which do not win. The only survived copy finds that it won. (Such “magic” can’t be measured by outside observer.)
It in fact somehow resemble two-slot experiment. It may be presented in following way: An electron sends its wave function to “see” all possible ways and “calculate” probabilities using all trajectories and their interference. After it, it move by one of this trajectories. Sending wave-function is like creating millions copies. Interference of trajectories which results in cancelling of trajectories is like killing wrong copies. Actual trajectory is like awakening in with wining ticket. Basically it helps the electron to create some “magic” like moving through two slots simultaneously.
While this explanation may be simplificated and probably wrong, I hope it may be food for thoughts. It does not include qualia, for example.
UPDATE: I think that first living organisms was able to use this also somehow, so it is not only for electrons and supercomputers, but also for living beings, and this ability evolve during evolution.
I feel sorry that I inspired this thread by my comment but did not elaborate it enough. Basically I have multilevel depositorium of wild ideas, with wildest are on the top. (I think I should make a map about it :) So I peak an idea from the next level of the depositorium, not the wildest one, to help Eltan. As I know that it is wild idea I can’t take it for granted and I understand that it needs more profound explanation. As I write slowly on foreign language, I was hesitated to go for long explanation which will only spoil my carma afterwords.
Basically, my idea would be easy to explain using quantum multiverse hypothesis. The explanatory logic when could be ported to Dust theory.
Different minds have different probabilities to exist in multiverse.
When, IF there is a way to influence probabilities of existence, when minds able to do so will dominate. It is just another explanation for natural selection and evolutionary psychology, nothing new here.
If there is other ways to change distribution of minds in different branches of multiverse, some minds will use it and will dominate and most likely we are such type of minds. Or, simply speaking, if magic is physically possible, when such magic capable mids would dominate, so they will be an attractor in total multiverse mind space. (Again, if you see Bostrom’s UN++ article you could find rational explanation how a mind could manipulate probability of future reality by almost magical means but in fact using Doomsday argument). It all depends of word “if”, so we can’t take it for granted.
I was speaking about it only to illustrate what is an attractor of minds in complex universe. Different complex universes has different mind attractors, for example, if time travel is possible, where will be constant loops as attractors.
Now we move to the topic. Suppose that many me-like-expirineces exist in different worlds. If I narrow my experience, it may exist in many more worlds. If I narrow it to a point, I could be almost everybody. When I open my eyes, and I become one of trillions different observers. Resulting process may be explained as jumping of consciousness from one observer to another. Personally, I think it is not a problem at all, as after many jumps consciousness will return to original observer and it will not have observable consequences.
Lets assume for the sake of the argument that such jumping may happen.
This jumping of consciousness from one observer to another may be represented as a line in the set of all possible observers, and such line may go almost infinite and random until it meet an observer that somehow prevents its jumping—he will be an attractor. How he could do it? His consciousness must be more stable and each small part of it must be more firmly connected with other.
Now the things go wilder. We will evaluate human consciousness for these criteria. Human has almost constant dreaming during sleep time, and I suggested that it may prevent consciousness from loosing its exact correspondence to mostly human and “his” world. (But on the next level of wilderness we could remember that yogis deliberately tries to experience one point state. I had it once during dream. It like a become a point even without colors or difference between audio and video.)
Also humans have qualia that are uniform inside all visual field (which is strange in fact). So any small qualia, any green point is enough to firmly correspondent to all possible experiences and thus stabilise them against jumping. I think that qualia are needed mostly to strictly stabilise worlds. I understood that I went too far for rationalist forum, so I will stop with my speculations how qualia stabilise the world.
What is Bostrom’s UN++ article?
EDIT: nevermind, google can easily find it
May it? DT and MWI don’t support the idea of consciousness that can detach itself and literally jump. Or if it is a metaphor, what is it a metaphor for?
Do you have any reason for believing that other than the inconvenience of the alternative?
I speak about DT and MWI in terms of opening post, where they need to explain more general theory which was named “flux universe”. Idea of flux universe is that things which are not inside your attention become blurred. The most well known example of blurred things us Shredinger cat. But in my opinion you do not need neither DT or MWI to get to flux reality. Because even in classical universe the same observers (copies) may exist in different circumstances. And if I deliberately exclude from my attention many things I will become equal to many other observers, thus changing size of my reference class.
I have no idea why you think this is the case. How would “magic-capable minds” dominate Mind Space? What even is magic? I read Bostrom’s UN++ paper and I do not understand how it is used in your logic.
Well, that’s where we will have to disagree.
Yes, this is precisely my understanding of it.
I’m afraid that I do not understand a single sentence here, and I can’t fathom how this has to do with magical powers.
No way, you’ve given far better answers than anyone else here.
Ok, first I will explain what do I mean using word “magic” here. I define magic as an ability to influence probability of your own success by direct manipulation of probabilities, rather than simple fitting. In Bostrom article Adam and Eve manipulate probabilities of useful events by manipulating total number of observers in their universe. Now is my claim: IF any magic is physically possible, when evolutionary process of natural selection has already use it. Because manipulating of probabilities of success of your offsprings will give you strong evolutionary advantage. This magic may be very small, just 51 percent chance to get better genes in offspring and 49 per cent chance not to die in 50-50 situation. This claim is not equal to the claim that any magic exist or any claims about possible mechanism of such magic. But if evolutionary small magic exist, we could find its evidence studying theory and history of the evolution. Such evidence would be unprobable genetic mutations or evolutionary jumps. (But one of explanatory mechanism of such magic could be just anthropic principle—we could find our selves only on the worlds there evolution was quick enough to create intelligence). But even stronger mechanism of evolutionary magic is possible, and they are most likely connected with manipulating за branches probabilities in the quantum multiverse.
And here we come to stronger claim: If any magic is possible in any part of quantum multiverse and is using manipulating of amount of branches - when we are most likely in such part of the multiverse. Prove: if someone able manipulate ammount of branches, it most likely is about creating many new branches. Many here means astronomically more. So we are probably here, based on self-sampling assumption.
Ok, lets try to explain one-pont state in your own words. Basically, your personality model consists of pure attention part P, and memory part M1. If P moves away from M1, it can’t return back and could go to any M2, M3 and so on. Basically one point state is pure attention without any experience. In words of contemporary philosopher BENJ HELLIE it is just “sole pellet”. Somehow it is possible to feel pure attention, may be it is a situation when it starts to experience itself. (Or maybe it is only illusion). Some esoteric theories are concentrated about this ability, mostly Dzogchen school of TIbet Buddhism (rigpa conception). But in european rational tradition one may remember phenomenalogical reduction by Husserl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Husserl#The_elaboration_of_phenomenology
Why? I think the mechanism has everything to do with it; can you think of any other way to perform ‘magic’ than Adam’s anthropic cheat? Besides, it wouldn’t even work- if he were being observed by us, we have no rational reason to believe that a wounded deer will come around, and we’d be right. It’s simply an anomaly brought about by Adam’s highly improbable perspective as the first of billions of observers.
OK, I think I have a better grasp now. But what are you arguing for? What’s the point?
I do not argue now, I just try to answer your questions. The final nature of reality is not known to me, but I have many interesting ideas. If our idea of reality is wrong it means that new existential risks exist. And may be new opportunities to prevent them.
Magic it self is not important, it is important that it require different nature of reality.
Now how to manipulate probabilities. For example I want to win in a lottery with chances 1 to 100. What I need to do so is a copy machine and external computer and MWI interpretation. I create 100 copies of me, and put them in sleep. Than external computer check result of the lottery and kill 99 sleeping copies which do not win. The only survived copy finds that it won. (Such “magic” can’t be measured by outside observer.)
It in fact somehow resemble two-slot experiment. It may be presented in following way: An electron sends its wave function to “see” all possible ways and “calculate” probabilities using all trajectories and their interference. After it, it move by one of this trajectories. Sending wave-function is like creating millions copies. Interference of trajectories which results in cancelling of trajectories is like killing wrong copies. Actual trajectory is like awakening in with wining ticket. Basically it helps the electron to create some “magic” like moving through two slots simultaneously.
While this explanation may be simplificated and probably wrong, I hope it may be food for thoughts. It does not include qualia, for example.
UPDATE: I think that first living organisms was able to use this also somehow, so it is not only for electrons and supercomputers, but also for living beings, and this ability evolve during evolution.