[time 207] Re: [time 206] Observation and infinity

Stephen P. King (stephenk1@home.com)
Sat, 10 Apr 1999 18:39:03 -0400

Dear Ben,

        Not to be quaint, but why does an atheist need to assume a finite
universe? I see an infinite universe as necessary for logical
completeness sake, so that any given model of the Universe, like the
information content of an LS, is only *complete* in the limit of an
infinite number of particles.
        I must say, we still have not addressed the question as to how LSs
encode information within themselves. I suppose that this can wait until
latter... ;)

Ben Goertzel wrote:
> At 01:01 AM 4/11/99 +0900, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> >Dear Stephen,
> >
> >Another possibility of avoiding Obler's paradox is to assume the universe
> >consists of a finite number of particles. I think we should retain this
> >possibility, seeing the present stage of the theory.
> >
> >Hitoshi
> Personally, I think that the universe should be assumed finite. As an atheist,
> I don't believe in infinity ;)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Oct 17 1999 - 22:31:51 JST