On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:55 AM Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 11 Sep 2019, at 01:30, Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> > > On 8 Sep 2019, at 13:59, Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If the only relevance you can find for many worlds is quantum immortality, > then many worlds is indeed dead. Quantum immortality has been shown many > times to be a complete nonsense. > > > Really. I did not known that. Could you give the references. > > Follow the Wikipedia entry on quantum suicide. > > That is not what I mean by a reference. > I later gave a reference to the paper by Mallah -- whom you know of, apparently. The paper is available at https://arxiv.org/abs/0902.0187 [.....] > None of this has anything to do with wave-packet reduction, so you can > rest easy. > > > You lost me here. With the wave reduction, there is just no quantum > immortality at all, nor even quantum suicide. I guess I mess something. > The argument was that QI makes no sense, even in a many-worlds setting. > The only “reasonable” critics was the one done by Jacques Mallah on this > list, which claims that if QI or MI is correct, we should expect to be very > old. But Quentin answered this validly: we expect in all situation to be > just a bit older than where we remember coming from, and the paradox comes > from a confusing between relative and absolute self-sampling on the states > or histories. > The trouble with this is that neither ASSA and RSSA is a law of nature. As I have said, from the 1p perspective, I live more years between 100 and 1000 than between 1 and 100. So I expect to be very old. What we remember is actually irrelevant -- we can always check our birth certificate if we forget how old we are. In other words, we can use external sources to refresh memories. What we personally remember at any instant is variable and unreliable. Check against external references..... > Typically, also, old and young are not absolute concept. > No, they are concepts relative to actual life span -- you are always at your youngest when you are born, and at your oldest just before you die. With mechanism or quantum mechanics without collapse, we can say that we > are always young. > Another good reason for abandoning mechanism. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTM7c97pmzXq5Fb%3D1nq%2BbdxfkqojZn%3DMXsuvhC%2BmLfy8A%40mail.gmail.com.
