Perhaps “Navier-Stokes” and “complexity” and such are (ironically) overcomplicating things. Let’s try to simplify:
I just walked out of a room with blue walls.
Is there a mathematically consistent universe in which, when I walk back in, the walls will have spontaneously turned red? Yellow? Plaid? (hint: for a universe with a set of physical rules S, is there anything mathematically inconsistent about the set “S union that-room-spontaneously-turns-red-in-2-minutes”?)
If all mathematically consistent universes exist and there is no special probability distribution preferring some over others, what subjective probability should I assign to the expectation that I will see the same shade of blue walls?
In the real world, what subjective probability should I assign?
If the previous two answers are different (for example, if the first probability is epsilon and the second is one minus epsilon...), why is that so?
Whoa, hold your horses, that’s a lot of complexity right there. We don’t have a way of describing what “I” even means, let alone simulate it. “walking” is also pretty complicated, though we do have some robots capable of that. And so on.
Is there a mathematically consistent universe in which, when I walk back in
Please don’t mix math with visual effects. But if you insist, Hollywood can do the color changing trick for you.
If all mathematically consistent universes exist
I don’t even know what this might mean. It does not use the term “exist” in any way I understand. Seems like some kind of trans-Platonism. And why insist on mathematical consistency? And how can something we can imagine be mathematically inconsistent, given that our brains are apparently equivalent to Turing machines?
Anyway, it’s pointless to discuss this further until we agree on some basics.
Perhaps “Navier-Stokes” and “complexity” and such are (ironically) overcomplicating things. Let’s try to simplify:
I just walked out of a room with blue walls.
Is there a mathematically consistent universe in which, when I walk back in, the walls will have spontaneously turned red? Yellow? Plaid? (hint: for a universe with a set of physical rules S, is there anything mathematically inconsistent about the set “S union that-room-spontaneously-turns-red-in-2-minutes”?)
If all mathematically consistent universes exist and there is no special probability distribution preferring some over others, what subjective probability should I assign to the expectation that I will see the same shade of blue walls?
In the real world, what subjective probability should I assign?
If the previous two answers are different (for example, if the first probability is epsilon and the second is one minus epsilon...), why is that so?
Whoa, hold your horses, that’s a lot of complexity right there. We don’t have a way of describing what “I” even means, let alone simulate it. “walking” is also pretty complicated, though we do have some robots capable of that. And so on.
Please don’t mix math with visual effects. But if you insist, Hollywood can do the color changing trick for you.
I don’t even know what this might mean. It does not use the term “exist” in any way I understand. Seems like some kind of trans-Platonism. And why insist on mathematical consistency? And how can something we can imagine be mathematically inconsistent, given that our brains are apparently equivalent to Turing machines?
Anyway, it’s pointless to discuss this further until we agree on some basics.