On 26 February 2014 19:31, chris peck <chris_peck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Liz > > *>> I meant changed from our everyday definition, in which we normally > assume there is only one you, which is (or is at least associated with) > your physical structure. Which we generally assume exists in one universe.* > > We lose that definition just by stepping into the realm of MWI don't we? > Its not as if we can have use of it in MWI until we want to argue that we > will always see 'spin up'. > > MWI forces upon us either the complete abandonment of any notion of > personal identity over time, or the equal distribution of it through all > the branches in which 'we' appear. > > Yes indeed. However we do cling on to our "apparent identities" even if we do believe the MWI is correct. For example I expect to go to work tomorrow, rather than unexpectedly being declared Empress of the Universe and never having to lift a finger again. I think we all know what happens once the MWI is assumed. The rest is just arguing over terminology. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
