> On 11 Nov 2019, at 14:59, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 4:18 AM Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be > <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: > > > when I am duplicated in Washington and Moscow, I don’t feel personally to > > be in both cities at once. > > Then what one and only one city do "you" personally feel to be in?
In the third person view on the first person view, you can say that I am in both city, and you can join me by phone at both places. But in Helsinki, I can only predict with certainties that I will feel to be in once city, and I am unable to say which one in advance. After the split, each “I” representing me know very well which one just by looking around. > If you can not clearly answer that question, The clear answer is the prediction I have made in Helsinki: with certainty, I will feel with to be in only one city, but I cannot predict which one among Washington and Moscow. The situation is similar with someone deciding to take a look at the Schroedinger cat: in the “3p” picture I will be both seeing a dead cat, and an alive cat, but before I can only predict that I will see one of the outcome, without assessing which one. If I was able to answer your question, you would win the debate, given that I assert that in Helsinki, nobody can predict what he will feel after the split in W and M. > and the history of this list provides overwhelming evidence that you cannot, > then the statement "I don’t personally feel to be in both cities at once" has > no meaning. *that* has no meaning. And in that case Everett QM has no meaning either. > The personal pronoun "I" that you're in the habit of using without thinking > has no meaning due to the fact that a "I" duplication machine is a key part > of the thought exparament. So what we end up with is a thought exparament > that lacks any thought. “I” is an indexical. Study the mathematical treatment if you have a problem with the version of the argument I made for non mathematicians. The 3p indexical “I” is obtained by the Kleene’s second recursion theorem, and the 1p indexical is given by the Theaetetus’ technic, literally imposed by incompleteness in this setting. That works very well. We find an intuitionistic logic for the first person notion, and diverses quantum logics for the physical prediction. Bruno > > John K Clark > > -- > 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 > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1cpt3WiV4tobXY2ySFkY6hU1atJB43ex506mUM%2BVrRiA%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1cpt3WiV4tobXY2ySFkY6hU1atJB43ex506mUM%2BVrRiA%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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/B8575B35-4888-40A1-8236-9D601DDB70BB%40ulb.ac.be.
