> On 27 Jun 2019, at 11:02, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 20:32, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: >> >> >> On 6/26/2019 7:18 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019, at 00:38, Bruce Kellett wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:24 AM Quentin Anciaux <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Le lun. 24 juin 2019 à 22:00, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List >>>> <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit : >>>> On 6/24/2019 12:56 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >>>>> Le lun. 24 juin 2019 à 20:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List >>>>> <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> What is "ordered"? A sample is just a sample, it has no order. If >>>>> quantum immortality is true, then you must exist at all ages. And a >>>>> sample from that distribution is unlikely to find you young. Sure, if >>>>> you condition on being young, then you will see young people around >>>>> you...because whether you are young or not you will see young people >>>>> around you. The problem is that YOU are most likely to be old. >>>>> >>>>> The thing is you had to be young first. You're talking with ASSA in mind. >>>>> ASSA is nonsense. >>>> >>>> So if I go on a thousand mile journey I'm most likely to find myself >>>> within a mile of my starting point. I think THAT's nonsense. >>>> >>>> >>>> You're not talking about mwi but a theory where moments exist by >>>> themselves and are selected randomly... That's nonsense. >>>> >>>> On the theory of quantum immortality, you have many more old moments than >>>> young moments. >>> >>> I disagree. Assuming that our timelines are constantly branching and that >>> for every amount of time t that we live there is some p probability that we >>> die for some reasons, and worst yet, this probability increases as we get >>> older, this tree will become sparser the deeper you go. >>> >>> If you apply self-sampling reasoning to the observer moments contained in >>> that tree, even though it may contain very deep branches, the probability >>> of finding oneself at such as depth becomes astronomically low. >>> >>> I would claim that the very assumptions that quantum immortality rests on >>> make it nonsensical to restrict self-sampling to a single timeline. >> >> Yes, I see that point. But if you have at least one timeline that is >> immortal, i.e. infinite, it can have higher measure than the sum of all >> those finite timelines...unless they are infinite in number(?). > > Yes, I agree that the finite timelines must be infinite in number for this to > work, and I also wonder if they can be infinite in number. > > Wild speculation: take something like the simulation argument or Bruno's > Universal Dovetailer. Perhaps the complexification process of Darwinism, then > human-like intelligence and whatever next is bound to create new > computational environments that start their own trees, in a fractal-like > fashion. > >> And as I understand quantum immortality, almost every time line is >> infinite. > > I guess it depends on how you define timeline. The way I see it: you can > almost always find a path from any node in the tree to infinity, but that > doesn't mean that most random paths are infinite. > > To be more clear, I think it makes sense to apply self-sampling to observer > moments rather than to personal identities (whatever that is). If the tree > connects observer moments and becomes sparser the deeper you go, then if you > select a random observer moment from the set of all observer moments in the > tree (and if there is infinite branching not only in depth but also in > breadth), then you are much more likely to find yourself near the root, even > though there is infinite depth.
Quentin is right on this, we cannot sample a random “observer moment” (cf ASSA, Absolute Self-Sampling Assumption) without taking the structure of that set into account. With Mechanism, we can use only a Relative SSA, both intuitively and formally, by incompleteness which distinguish between provable(p) and “provable(p) & consistent”. That makes the measuret problem very difficult, because a priori we don’t know that structure, but that is why it is amazing and extraordinary that the universal machine is already able to tell us so much on that measure on the universal dovetailing (aka sigma_1 restriction): at the propositional level for the logic of the “measure one for the observable (defined by true in “existing” consistent extension, cf []p & <>t)”, incompleteness, i.e. the arithmetical completeness theorem about incompleteness (by Solovay 1976) provides as much structure are possible for having “the” laws of the observable (in company of relation with provable, knowable, sensible and … true). When assuming Mechanism, we can trust the mathematical constraints to be constraining enough the solve the problem, as neither an added God, nor an added Matter could help: - If the help is Turing emulable, it happens already with the right relative measure in the universal dovetailing (that is, in very elementary arithmetic (thanks to a less easy theorem by Robinson, Tarski and Mostowski). - If the help is not Turing emulable, then you can’t say yes to the digitalist surgeon. Correct or incorrect, the machine’s theology/philosophy can be used to compare all approaches. It is a sort of etalon, and an example of precise theory. Now, it requires the study of some amount of mathematical logic, but with the hypothesis of computationalism (in cognitive science), it should be obvious that theoretical computer science has to say some word, if not play the major role. It already provides a precise mathematical definition of “computable” and computation. Plotinus’ theory of matter is that materiality is where God loses control, the absolute indeterminate, and it is basically evil. He got the insight that it requires what he called, I think with Plato (Timeaeus), a bastard calculus. A calculus on what we cannot’ calculate. Modern Neo-neo-platonists know it is also a mathematical beauty, though. (Neo-neo-platonism is Neoplatonism + Church’s thesis). It is a NeoPythagoreanism. Bruno > > Telmo. > >> >> Brent >> >> >>> >>> Telmo. >>> >>>> If it is nonsense that this means that you are more likely to find >>>> yourself old, then this is the same nonsense that underlies any account of >>>> quantum phenomena in terms of self-location on some branch of the wave >>>> function or the other. >>>> >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTTRSng8Yi4CvD7NOynM7VWd3vgY6j6abgCZxKx8CUDOw%40mail.gmail.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTTRSng8Yi4CvD7NOynM7VWd3vgY6j6abgCZxKx8CUDOw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >>> >>> -- >>> 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 [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ccba6dbf-c2f0-4e45-bcb2-bb68657b2f6e%40www.fastmail.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ccba6dbf-c2f0-4e45-bcb2-bb68657b2f6e%40www.fastmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >> >> >> -- >> 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 [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9af0c776-beec-dc58-e700-31be2e1dfd79%40verizon.net >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9af0c776-beec-dc58-e700-31be2e1dfd79%40verizon.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > > -- > 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 [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c3781026-3617-48f6-beb9-0c6013498692%40www.fastmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c3781026-3617-48f6-beb9-0c6013498692%40www.fastmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/7D8BE964-00E2-4156-BF96-CD28B232A518%40ulb.ac.be.
