Mortebianca CRT for tier 1

[Tago238]

“No, at that time it was him mind and perception only.”
Saying he physically transcended to multiple dimensions above timelines would mean he was 6-D then.

“Some people who assimilated all the energy in the universe, in an attempt to get more energy, travel to the past to grab that energy. They succeed, but by consequence there is less energy in the future, so their overall energy stays the same.”

No? That’s just the universe following causality, not that the universe isn’t split up into uncountable cross sections. ‘S like saying if you went back in time to destroy an object and that object didn’t exist in the future the STC must be 3-A because continuous time didn’t resurrect it somehow.

 

[Tago238]

Seems like you are probably in the clear with that thread though.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

I only thought that Tegmark’s type IV multiverse was platonic in that mathematics is a real structure- I mean I remember that in MUH humans are literally mathematical substructures. The “every possible universe” which are instantiated are in themselves or as a collective the mathematics Tegmark refers to.

They are mathematical insofar as the rest of reality, too, abides by mathematics and exists in perfect correspondence to it, not in the sense they are literally the same as the platonic world that Tegmark describes. The MUH moreso posits that mathematics exist as the underlying substratum of each universe, still transcending time and space and being the static "blueprint" out of which their particulars are formed, so there isn't much of a difference between it and basic mathematical platonism in that regard.

I mean even if we were to just extend any reference to a real theory to the actual theory itself beyond what the work has referenced

Do we really apply this even in regards to the most basic building block of the theory, though? Even the idea that mathematics actually exists independently from physical existence (Which Mortebianca seems to explicitly mention, and which is the very basis of the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis) already falls under the Platonist view by necessity, so, I don't see why we'd be so nitpicky when it comes to that.

 

[Tago238]

“They are mathematical insofar as the rest of reality, too, abides by mathematics and exists in perfect correspondence to it, not in the sense they are literally the same as the platonic world that Tegmark describes. The MUH moreso posits that mathematics exist as the underlying substratum of each universe, still transcending time and space and being the static "blueprint" out of which their particulars are formed, so there isn't much of a difference between it and basic mathematical platonism in that regard.”

They are mathematical insofar as they are a direct mathematical substructure from the TOE, there isn’t an ideal/physical boundary at play. It’s less a blueprint and more a larger structure entailing smaller, component ones, but because it’s mathematical all of these components and the larger structure can be conceptualised. This is the main piece of logic used throughout the entirety of Tegmark’s paper.

 

[Tago238]

Conclusion.

Given that staff agrees with me I think it’s fair to make the changes I proposed.

 

[Tago238]

Bump

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

I agree with you two, I forgot also. I'm fine with that - and I might as well link the quotes blog on the main profile with the update.

I'll try to put the new proposals into a sandbox today.

 

[Tago238]

Thanks.

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

A bit late, but here it is.

 

[Tago238]

There are grammar mistakes I can fix later and I think the last key should just have “[[Subjective Reality]], varies with sub powers (he and reality is whatever he imagines it to be)”. Apart from that it seems fine. Thanks.

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

Thanks to you!