Comments on: The Self Organizing Quantum Universe

By: I Need to Blog More & Tweet Less « Psychohistory

I Need to Blog More & Tweet Less « Psychohistory — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 06:07:42 +0000

[...] Blogging allows me to keep a diary of topics of interest (The Self Organizing Quantum Universe) [...]

By: Adam Nash

Adam Nash — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 02:33:35 +0000

I’m glad you like the post. I think you’re defining the anthropic principle over-broadly. The reason this theory avoids the anthropic principle is because it says that lining up a system this way will result in this outcome. The anthropic principle is typically stated as the universe is this way because if it wasn’t, we wouldn’t be here to ask about it. There are weak & strong versions, but you get the point.

Completely different.
Adam

By: Pierre Rousseau

Pierre Rousseau — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:04:53 +0000

Could you please explain why you say this new quantum gravity theory avoids the anthropic principle fallback.

Are you saying the anthropic principle fallback is wrong, or just that it discourages further explanation of things? In other words that it is essentially saying we are what we are. (often used to counter the argument for a creator: of the impossibility of the probability of things coming to the state of being exactly how they are). In fact I think the virtually infinite improbability of how we are is an argument against the existence of a creator.

To me the article on quantum gravity, when it includes one-direction causality, in fact supports the anthropic principle. Things are how they are. We can never go back. To have regrets is foolish.

You have convinced me. I am going to subscribe to Scientific American.