On 30 Jun 2012, at 19:28, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>> As I said before if you really had complete information then you
could make 2 predictions:
1) I Bruno Marchal will write in my diary "I Bruno Marchal am now in
Washington and only Washington".
2) I Bruno Marchal will write in my diary "I Bruno Marchal am now in
Moscow and only Moscow".
Afterwards both diaries can be shown to anyone who is interested
proving that there was no indeterminacy and the prediction is
confirmed to be completely correct.
> But from the 1-pov, we know in advance that those two prediction
are incompatible.
There are incompatible from the "1-pov" ONLY if you assume there can
be only one Bruno Marchal
"1-pov" means "1-pov" from the 1-pov view. There is only one. Even if
I am duplicated into 10^100, all of them will have a unique pov. The
probability question bears on those unique pov (from their unique pov
view).
and there is no logical reason for making that assumption, therefore
I at this "1-pov" will not do so.
>> Things become paradoxical only if you make the assumption that
there can only be one Bruno Marchal, therefore the assumption must
be untrue.
> you confuse 1 pov and 3 pov,
You keep repeating that over and over like a mantra, but there is a
possibility it is you that is confused.
>> Things become paradoxical only if you make the assumption that
there can only be one Bruno Marchal, therefore the assumption must
be untrue.
> all those Bruno Marchal, whoever they are will still each feel to
be only one of them.
Yes, and there is rock solid proof that is exactly precisely what
was predicted to happen,
Correct, but the question is on the content of the 1-pov. And the
theory predict that those content will be exlcuive and non compatible,
as you write correctly above.
if you doubt this just look and see what was written in the diary
before the experiment started, it's right there clear as a bell in
black and white. So where is this spectral "first person
indeterminacy" you keep talking about?
The incompatible experience "I feel to be in M" and "I feel to be in
W". After the experience we can interview the two copies, and they
will confirm it.
> we agree that there are both "bruno marchal"
Exactly.
> and so the prediction was wrong.
WHAT?? He could have also written in his diary "the Bruno Marchal
who calls himself "I" and sees Washington will not be the Bruno
Marchal who calls himself "I" who does NOT see Washington". He could
have added that to his official prediction, but I think writing
something so thunderously obvious would be a waste of ink.
No. It helps to understand that from the 1-pov, the experience was not
predictible. Your move consists in looking all the time from the 3-pov
on the 1-pov, but the question bears on the 1-pov from the 1-pov.
It is simoilar as what happens when you look at up+down in an {up,
down} analyser. QM predicts you will be in the superposition state,
but comp explain you will feel only one branch.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
