From: Nick Tarleton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jan 23 2008 - 16:05:11 MST
On Jan 23, 2008 4:04 PM, Matt Mahoney <email@example.com> wrote:
> The simplest simulator would try different values of these and other physical
> constants. Some would result in universes that support life, and others not.
> The laws of physics are as they are because otherwise we would not be here.
Other laws of physics could still support observers in our reference
class (whatever that class is). Thus, it still makes sense to ask "why
these laws and not some others?" For instance, if simpler laws are
more likely to be observed, why are there mu/tau leptons and
strange/charm/bottom/top quarks? Should I predict that someone will
eventually discover that at least 3 particle families are necessary to
produce an appropriate elemental distribution for life?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:01 MDT