Can we live in another world?

[philosopher]

Pressumption 1:

If the mind/consciousness is a state of matter we should be able to ressurrect the dead, teleport our minds etc. - at least theoretically, simply by replicating the same set of mathematical equations that make up our minds just in different entities in different times and different spaces.

Please read the article in the link before proceeding.

Pressumption 2:

Why have only 1 universe with a certain set of equations? Even if there was a universe prior to our big bang, that universes live and die, what if there is no boundary to multiple universes - some even interacting with each other?

Conclusion:

Why wouldn't this vast infinite multiverse be able to mix and some fraction, just some small portion of this infinite universe be able to evolve some universes with: A) Long-lasting/ever-lasting & B) super-intelligent life which would be able to predict the existence of our universe, our minds and re-create our minds inside a super computer or other technological device, given the set of equations making up our minds, as in Pressumption 1?

Remember: According to Pressumption 1, there should be infinite ways of making universes, but to make this idea be true, it only have to work once!

Would this lead to us continue living in some other world after we die in our universe?

Granted, this may sound far-fetched, but I'd still like to investigate the idea.

[IstillBELIEVEinPOMO]

Pressumption 1:

If the mind/consciousness is a state of matter we should be able to ressurrect the dead, teleport our minds etc. - at least theoretically, simply by replicating the same set of mathematical equations that make up our minds just in different entities in different times and different spaces.

Please read the article in the link before proceeding.

Pressumption 2:

Why have only 1 universe with a certain set of equations? Even if there was a universe prior to our big bang, that universes live and die, what if there is no boundary to multiple universes - some even interacting with each other?

Conclusion:

Why wouldn't this vast infinite multiverse be able to mix and some fraction, just some small portion of this infinite universe be able to evolve some universes with: A) Long-lasting/ever-lasting & B) super-intelligent life which would be able to predict the existence of our universe, our minds and re-create our minds inside a super computer or other technological device, given the set of equations making up our minds, as in Pressumption 1?

Remember: According to Pressumption 1, there should be infinite ways of making universes, but to make this idea be true, it only have to work once!

Would this lead to us continue living in some other world after we die in our universe?

Granted, this may sound far-fetched, but I'd still like to investigate the idea.

The article compares consciousness as a state of matter to vapor, water and ice as different states.

If we take water in its present state and place it in a different universe with different laws of physics, would it continue in that state?

If you move water to a different environment in the universe we live in right now its state might change and it might become vapor or ice, never mind moving it to other universes.

Why would consciousness be any different? Why would consciousness--why would a unified set of mathematical equations that cannot be broken down into parts--survive a move to a different universe without its state changing?

[TimeSeeker]

Mathematics is just a language. What matters is the interpretation (grounding/parsing) of the language and so you need to take behaviorism into account.

The laws of physics interpret/parse "the mathematics". In a different world with different physical laws - our current equations will probably not work.

So any mathematical description of consciousness from this universe is unlikely to behave in the same way.

[philosopher]

The article compares consciousness as a state of matter to vapor, water and ice as different states.

If we take water in its present state and place it in a different universe with different laws of physics, would it continue in that state?

If you move water to a different environment in the universe we live in right now its state might change and it might become vapor or ice, never mind moving it to other universes.

Why would consciousness be any different? Why would consciousness--why would a unified set of mathematical equations that cannot be broken down into parts--survive a move to a different universe without its state changing?

Mathematics is just a language. What matters is the interpretation (grounding/parsing) of the language and so you need to take behaviorism into account.

The laws of physics interpret/parse "the mathematics". In a different world with different physical laws - our current equations will probably not work.

So any mathematical description of consciousness from this universe is unlikely to behave in the same way.

If we have a universe where a state of matter of consciousness is the same as in ours despite different laws of physics, you could have conscious beings with similar conscious awareness like us. So, when we die on Earth in our Universe 1, we might continue living in Universe 2 - Even though information need not travel from one universe to another. What matters is the conscious state of matter that is similar in Universe 2 to that of our Universe 1.

Of course we wouldn't neccessarily remember anything from our life on Earth in Universe 1, because information cannot travel between the two. The intelligent beings re-creating "us" (our conscious awareness) would have to GUESS how our conscious states of matter are for each and every single one of us of the entire population from the very first man and woman since the beginning of humanity. It is very unlikely, but theoretically not impossible given an infinite number of possibilities.

[Noax]

Pressumption 1:

If the mind/consciousness is a state of matter we should be able to ressurrect the dead, teleport our minds etc. - at least theoretically, simply by replicating the same set of mathematical equations that make up our minds just in different entities in different times and different spaces.

Please read the article in the link before proceeding.

The linked article is entitled in a way that makes it sound like the physicist (Tegmark) came up with the idea of consciousness being a material thing, which is at least 400 years old.
That aside, Tegmark apparently asserts that if you arrange matter into a contained thing that exhibits these quantifiable qualities, the thing would be conscious. The article says he lists ability to efficiently store and retrieve information and to be some kind of whole thing. It leaves off the retrieval of information.

This is hardly resurrection of the dead. If I arrange matter into something similar to you in another place, it is a matter of arbitrary designation to consider the thing to be you, or the person that died or whatever. This is no different than the designation that you now are the same entity as the different arrangement of different matter at some point decades ago.

Pressumption 2:

Why have only 1 universe with a certain set of equations? Even if there was a universe prior to our big bang, that universes live and die, what if there is no boundary to multiple universes - some even interacting with each other?

If they interact, I think that by definition they're not separate universes or even separate worlds.

Would this lead to us continue living in some other world after we die in our universe?

Besides my point in #1 about it actually being the continuation of another entity instead of just a different entity, there is the issue that there is no meaning to 'continuation' if there is no meaningful way to order the existence of the two entities (this one first, and then it was over in this other universe). This sort of presumes that time is external and common to universes, which is hardly the mind-is-state-of-matter model.

[Noax]

Pressumption 1:

If the mind/consciousness is a state of matter we should be able to ressurrect the dead, teleport our minds etc. - at least theoretically, simply by replicating the same set of mathematical equations that make up our minds just in different entities in different times and different spaces.

Please read the article in the link before proceeding.

The linked article is entitled in a way that makes it sound like the physicist (Tegmark) came up with the idea of consciousness being a material thing, which is at least 400 years old.

I got this quite wrong. The actual blog page linked from the brief article is quite an informative read. It uses 'state of matter' like solid, liquid and gas are different states of the same matter. A way was found to quantify traits of consciousness, allowing existing information theory and quantum theory to be applied to the problem.

[TimeSeeker]

If we have a universe where a state of matter of consciousness is the same as in ours despite different laws of physics, you could have conscious beings with similar conscious awareness like us. So, when we die on Earth in our Universe 1, we might continue living in Universe 2 - Even though information need not travel from one universe to another. What matters is the conscious state of matter that is similar in Universe 2 to that of our Universe 1.

If consciousness (minds) are emergent properties of matter. And matter is bound by the physical laws. And information is a physical property of all systems (universes) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_information

The moment your brain matter behaves in a different way (because different laws of physics) - it's bye-bye Kansas.

[Philosophy Explorer]

I regard math as descriptive, not prescriptive.

PhilX

[IstillBELIEVEinPOMO]

Is the article saying that consciousness is its own state? There's gases, liquids and solids, and then there's consciousness?

[TimeSeeker]

I regard math as descriptive, not prescriptive.

PhilX

Programming languages (when executed) are prescriptive Math.

Lambda calculus. Curry-Howard isomorphism etc.

[Philosophy Explorer]

I regard math as descriptive, not prescriptive.

PhilX

Programming languages (when executed) are prescriptive Math.

Lambda calculus. Curry-Howard isomorphism etc.

I mean prescriptive in a different way. The math describes the situation through the program (just because the program uses math doesn't mean it's math itself).

PhilX

[TimeSeeker]

I regard math as descriptive, not prescriptive.

PhilX

Programming languages (when executed) are prescriptive Math.

Lambda calculus. Curry-Howard isomorphism etc.

I mean prescriptive in a different way. The math describes the situation through the program (just because the program uses math doesn't mean it's math itself).

PhilX

I am merely giving you evidence to expand your vocabulary/taxonomy (if you want to).

Programming languages are Mathematics. Programs are Mathematical proofs.

Read up on the Curry-Howard isomorphism and Lambda calculus.

This means Matrmatics (realized in software) has mearusable effect on the world. So Mathematics is ... real? And it can be descriptive or prescriptive.