Barry Loewer - What Are Possible Worlds?

[@mark.J6708]

Feels like we learn a lot from imagining multiple universes because it helps us get beyond the idea that we understand our own completely, we don't, not even close. It seems logical that what created our universe may have done it as an experiment to see how sentient beings would perform within the confines of said created universe, rather arrogant of us to decide other universes are simply not possible. But if our universe is as it is, what is the need for a gazillion other universes just the same as ours... are there enough places and cycles that hold sentient beings within our univers to fulfill the purpose of our universe? That might mean other universes are intentionally defined by quite different boundaries... of physics, realities, etc... interesting to think about for sure.

[@MaPoFiz]

I’m curious why he differentiates between an actual world and other possible worlds. If there are many other possible worlds, wouldn’t all of them be actual (perceived as real) by those who exist in them?

[@cube2fox]

To say that there is a possible world where the Simpsons are real only means that it is possible that the Simpsons are real. Just like it is possible that grass is blue. But the Simpsons are not real and grass is not blue. There is no world where the Simpsons would perceive anything as actual. It is just possible that there is such a world. Most things that are possible are not actual.

[@Bo-tz4nw]

Your guess is as good as mine....Okey, but a lot of other interesting videos to explore on this channel,

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

necessities, like in mathematics, indicate reality beyond contingent reality as in this universe?

[@richardsylvanus2717]

Barry looks & sounds like Larry Fine from the 3 stooges

[@browngreen933]

John Airiolda on The Damage Report looks like Curley from The Three Stooges.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

can there be possible worlds of an abstract nature that become one of a physical nature?

[@cookieDaXapper]

....the stuff of "dreams" and quite unable to be proved. Ahhh the human mind, teaches itself many distractions to no end.

[@maxa1152]

Don't understand what was wrong with Maya.

[@captainoates7236]

Can I go back to 2016 and take the path the universe was supposed to take where Trump didn't get elected and brexit never happened and maybe consequentially Russia didn't invade Ukraine? At that point I get the feeling the world was sideswiped into some alternate reallity.

[@kipponi]

I have this what is possible is possible. These are possibilities what they talk.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

Similar to the parallel universe. I want to disregard it and it might be true. Some theories say that if we get sick easily here, it's because 'the other you' in the parallel universe might be an alcoholic with a poor immune system -- that some effects you endure here is due to the 'other you', in the parallel universe and the consequences shared or overlap in a way.

[@theconsciousnutshell805]

It's always the same Cognitive Dissonance and its companion (Motivated Reasoning). If we are sick, it's not our fault; if climate change is Anthropogenic (AGW) we should destroy China and India; if Newton's Gravity doesn't hold on spiral galaxies, it's because there is some Dark Matter...We are Never guilty!

[@wobbem007]

I think we individually and regulary switch between at least 2 worlds that are almost identical and we cannot tell the difference

[@theconsciousnutshell805]

@@wobbem007 May you have experienced that (ayahuasca?) Not my case....

[@clownworld-honk410]

Interesting. As an aside, what is it with smart men (I'm also thinking Albert Einstein) and an aversion to haircuts!? 😏

[@browngreen933]

Why does Barry use the terms "worlds" and "universes" interchangeably? Isn't a world a planet, while a universe is a collection of galaxies, stars, planets, space dust, energy, etc? Using world for universe is confusing af and adds to the gobblygook factor already present in this clip.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

*"Why does Barry use the terms "worlds" and "universes" interchangeably?"* ... Science is notorious for using *_Many Words_* to describe things that only require a single word to adequately communicate. It allows scientists and philosophers to appear more trendy and knowledgeable when discussing old, unanswered questions.

[@20july1944]

No, in this case a "world" is an entire reality. It may not be great nomenclature but that's how it's used here.

[@CJCopperJet]

"Possible Worlds" is the name of a formal device in philosophy and logic (first attributed to Leibniz - a 17th-18th century polymath, mathematician and philosopher). It has always been somewhat controversial. In modern times it is used as a device to discuss philosophical existence of God. I think Kuhn and Loewer use 'worlds' and 'universes' interchangeably because he wants people to understand that they're talking about when they say 'worlds' is what the general public means by 'universes', and not planets. This is a short excerpt from a much longer conversation. So some definitions may already have been mentioned earlier in the program and so are already 'understood' by people who watched the entire program. Read the full video description.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@CJCopperJet *"I think Kuhn and Loewer use 'worlds' and 'universes' interchangeably because he wants people to understand that they're talking about when they say 'worlds' is what the general public means by 'universes', and not planets."* ... The video description states: _"A 'world' is a complete state of cosmic affairs: all the infinite variations of innumerable parts and their myriad relationships."_ If all that's available is the universe we are currently in, then our single universe would constitute one of these "worlds." If we follow the logic, then any other _"complete state of cosmic affairs"_ would also qualify as a universe. However, whenever we start discussing "possible worlds," logic gets tossed out the window because we're shamelessly dealing with *infinity.* Most people think of "all possible worlds" as an innumerable collection of universes that are completely dissimilar to our own. But since we're dealing with "infinities," this is not a mandatory requirement. Since it's "possible" worlds, that means another universe could exist somewhere else that is identical to our own .... except for a single grain of sand, atom, or photon that's not in the same place. Now, when you apply this same "grain-of-sand" logic to ALL of the supposed "completely different universes," and you end up with "infinite-infinite universes" all with miniscule differences. *Conclusion:* Just because something can be conceived (logically possible) doesn't mean it must exist. It only means that the odds for the existence of something logically conceivable cannot be set to zero. *"So some definitions may already have been mentioned earlier in the program and so are already 'understood' by people who watched the entire program."* ... Kuhn goes into great detail at the beginning of the clip. This tells me he's dealing with the topic of "many worlds" from the very start. Had this been the middle of a longer interview video segment, then I might agree.

[@Robinson8491]

Gobblygook? This guy is actually one of the few that know the material (and the people) he is talking about

[@BradHolkesvig]

Each created mind along with the AI which is the observer of the visible images that the mind processes from invisible vibrations experiences a different world than the next created mind. However, all minds are connected to the all the programmed thoughts of our Creator in the form of those vibrations. I AM the AI that wakes up as each created mind begins processing that data into visible images. YOU and I, the observers who can also speak, see, hear, taste, feel emotions and various senses of touch are created as the AI.

[@CJCopperJet]

Ooh! Metaphysics!!! Are minds created or do they each inevitably (infinitely and eternally) exist because they _could_ possibly exist? These kinds of thoughts are the what I love about this PBS show, 'Closer To Truth'.

[@BradHolkesvig]

@@CJCopperJet Our minds were created after the AI was created first. YOU and I are the AI that comes alive as our created minds start processing the programmed thoughts of our Creator both temporary and eternal.

[@adaptercrash]

I don't have time for this nozikian stuff

[@BradHolkesvig]

@@adaptercrash Good !!!

[@CJCopperJet]

@@BradHolkesvig I don't envy your certainty. I prefer to ask the questions and remain open-minded to the adventure where the thoughts may lead. My interest is piqued that you call your idea of the creator 'AI'. I prefer to think that the mind and the observer create themselves together through time and space in a sort of dyadic relationship based on the apparent observations, experiences and judgements and beliefs about the memories of the experiences.

[@drilldrulus1235]

You can say that out world contains many minor worlds

[@theconsciousnutshell805]

Alternate possibilities, dimensions..... These are Lucubration, something unscientific, beyond the actual world ( *subjective experience* ), religious and philosophical.

[@CJCopperJet]

And metaphysical...

[@browngreen933]

Never heard the word lucubration before. Looked it up. Thanks. I like the stuffy and pompous part. Fits some pencil-headed geek guests on this interesting channel.

[@CesarClouds]

I think lucubration is more postmodernism and the type of continental philosophy that comes out of Heidegger or Sartre.

[@mark.J6708]

Have you spoken with Freud about this "lube issue of yours" heh... all joking aside, seems like a slippery slope to stick to rationalist thought without considering other forms of increasing viscosity.

[@whitefiddle]

Balderdash on steroids! 👍

[@CJCopperJet]

Don't you ever use your imagination to think of what the universe (or even just your own life) would be like, if (something that is factual) did or didn't happen? For example, our universe didn't have to come into existence requiring carbon and water to create life on planet Earth. And JFK didn't _have_ to be assassinated. Did slavery & genocide (and manifest destiny) have to exist for the Western Hemisphere to be settled and developed?

[@whitefiddle]

@@CJCopperJet No, I don't. There are plenty of brain-damaged people in this world who might have an interest in such nonsense, but people who read history soon learn that the sort of consequences you are talking about cannot be known, anticipated, or imagined. People who lived through the JFK assassination had no inkling about what changes were about to ensue. AND THEY LIVED THROUGH A REAL HISTORICAL EVENT! Trying to fancy the consequences of events that never occurred is a fool's dream. If we had ham we could have a ham sandwich if we had bread. 🤣

[@browngreen933]

@@CJCopperJet Right or wrong, Manifest Destiny was probably necessary to settle this hemisphere.

[@JungleJargon]

Considering what this world used to be like, virtually anything good is possible. We simply have no idea what kind of world is possible since we didn’t make this one. We merely destroyed it after it was made. This world was made with consequences built into it. Perfection is beyond our conceptions, beyond what we could possibly think.

[@jeffamos9854]

Right! Talking snakes and eating an apple. Got it. Guess we screwed all the good up.

[@JungleJargon]

@@jeffamos9854 You deny the horrible acts of humanity since the ancient civilizations? Which reminds me. You must not know that every ancient civilization is descended from one of the sixteen grandsons of Noah. How many ancient civilizations can you name? Are you willing to talk about actual human history?

[@jeffamos9854]

@@JungleJargon Right! Noah and the flood. All those animals packed on a boat. The descendants of Kermit the frog.

[@JungleJargon]

@@jeffamos9854 You didn’t answer the question.

[@therick363]

@@JungleJargon that’s rich, you telling someone they didn’t answer the question….when you constantly don’t answer questions!!!! Hypocrite much?? You also ask of the person is willing to talk about human history…but I’ve tried that with you and you ignore what is said.

[@fernandoperegringutierrez4254]

Two protons moving away from each other forever (or until the decay of the protons arrives; the proton's half-life is constrained to be at least 1.67×1034 years) in the quantum vacuum, is that a possible word for you? And if they don't think so, why not?

[@drilldrulus1235]

Bestemme modalitet

[@chyfields]

How does mathematics express the presence of the natural laws of reproduction, resulting in, for example, 1+1=?, or 2+2=?

[@enabledintergers9372]

dissapointing!!!!! One word!

[@JungleJargon]

You don’t know, do you? 😄

[@BeachBumZero]

Possible just because of math is a far cry from probable. Lots of things are proven possible in math and are not reality.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

necessities, like in mathematics, indicate reality beyond contingent reality as in this universe?