Quentin

>> Then under MWI, same thing you're garanteed to see all results, so 
>> probability should also be one

Deterministic branching leads to trouble rendering the idea of probability 
coherent. Go figure! Who would ever have guessed determinism and chance were 
difficult to marry... 

Subject: Re: A riddle for John Clark
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
From: meeke...@verizon.net
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:25:00 -0700


  
    
  
  
    On 7/22/2015 12:08 AM, Bruno Marchal
      wrote:

    
    

      
        On 21 Jul 2015, at 19:42, meekerdb wrote:
        
        
          
          
            On 7/21/2015 10:30 AM, Bruno
              Marchal wrote:

            
            
              
                  So maybe
                    one could see W AND W the same way I can see my
                    computer screen AND my dog - just by attending to
                    one or the other.

                  
              
              

              
              You will need a long neck to attend a conference in
                Moscow, and a party in Washington. You can use a
                tele-vision system, and communicate by SMS, but unless
                you build a new corpus callosum between the two brains,
                and fuse the limbic system, by comp, the two "original"
                persons have become two persons, having each its unique
                experience. That follows from mechanism, and so P(W xor
                M) = 1, and P(W & M) = 0, as no one can open door in
                Moscow, and see some other city in the direct way of the
                first person experience.
            
            

            It follows from
              physics.  
        
        

        
        We don't know that. 
      
    
    

    Then why did you assert the necessity of a physical connection: "You
    will need a long neck to attend a conference in Moscow, and a party
    in Washington."

    

    
      
        We just assume that the physics is rich enough to implement
          locally universal machine, so that comp make sense, but then
          we arrive at the computationalist difficulties. Physics assume
          a brain/mind link which has to be justified, and the UDA shows
          the change we have to introduce. 

        
      
    
    

    But you have effectively asserted that the duplicate persons at
    different locations do not experience both locations - their minds
    are separate because their brains are.  If that is more than just an
    assumption it is because it is relying on the physical basis of
    mind.  If you reject the physical basis of mind then you might
    expect the duplicates to share one mind.

    

    Brent

    

    
      
        

        
        

        
        

        
          But does it follow from UD
              computations?

            
        
        

        
        It should, (at step 7 and 8) and the point is only that it
          is testable. 
        Up to now, it is working well. But to explain this, we need
          to dig deeper in computer science.
        

        
        Are you OK with the steps 0-6? 0-7? From your other posts,
          I think you were OK. So we can perhaps come back on step 8. I
          think Bruce Kellet has also some problem there. That can only
          be more intersting than the nonsense about step 3 that we can
          hear those days.
        

        
        Bruno
        

        
        

        
        

        
        

        
           

              Brent

             
          
          
          -- 

          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/d/optout.

        
      
      

       
          
            http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
            
            
          
        
      
      

      -- 

      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/d/optout.

    
    

  





-- 

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/d/optout.
                                          

-- 
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/d/optout.

Reply via email to