Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Bruce Kellett]

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 4:02 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> An interesting discussion of Everettian QM in two parts.  The first part
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyvgBe9VV70
>
> is just David Albert and Sean Carroll.  It's quite reminiscent of JKC and
> Bruno, using the same thought experiments (but more civil).
>
> Brent
>


This was from a video-based conference organized by Harvard only last
month. The website for the conference is:

https://harvardfop.jacobbarandes.com/20200818mw

And the three videos are one by Sean Carroll:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R7elwozou4

The one by David Albert that Brent referenced:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyvgBe9VV70

And an interesting hour of discussion with Lev Vaidman, Carlo Rovelli,
David Wallace, and others. This is probably the most interesting of the
three.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdgccgMhXtw

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/CAFxXSLR1ud9HOZ8dYx2KQNfek0eXuAGWoPqwv0gsRNnQx3d5Xg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[spudboy100 via Everything List]

Oh the money thing, I am not concerned about, because it's not a trigger issue 
for me. The Wimpiness, that you see is far better (for me!) then a prez caving 
into dem assaults by nobly taking up the shute, like a man! Witness, the 
Romneys, the Bushes, the old line Rep wealthy, too dignified to get down on the 
enemy's level and strike back.To genuflect to the now, Neo-Soviet party. I used 
to vote for them straight-ticket, back in the day. Bring unto me a thug, 
because it takes a thug to 'wup' a thug. However, my wee opinion doesn't count, 
and it looks like we will have greater and greater 'civil conflict' in the 
month and years to come. 


-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, Sep 10, 2020 3:32 pm
Subject: Re: Probability in Everettian QM

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 2:59 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:
 
 > I did mean Sean Carroll and it was he who argues against (2017) that a 
 > clone, even a perfect one, is never you,

I had thought I had read all of Sean Carroll's books but perhaps I missed one, 
where did Sean Carroll say that?  
 > because of no physical continuity.

And if there is no physical continuity between you and a perfect clone of you 
then where in the world did the information to make that perfect clone come 
from?   

>On Orange Man, he his the best we can do because his opposition takes direct 
>and indirect payments from Chairman Xi

15 times Trump praised China as coronavirus was spreading across the globe 
Trump says he fell in love with North Korea's murderous dictator 


> Obnoxious but tough,

Obnoxious certainly, but tough?? The man is a wimp, "unfair" is Trump's 
favorite word, this son of a billionaire is full of self-pity, has severe daddy 
issues, and is constantly whining about how the world is being very unfair to 
him. 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0LFbQKVjUTSao3R7wOor35uqFHfYWFq%3DyZ2MoorAx2Jw%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
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/300135308.3234689.1599862778396%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[John Clark]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 3:06 PM Stathis Papaioannou 
wrote:

*>You’re not giving an example of what people might say when the walk into
> or out of duplication machines.*


How can I answer that? There are a lot of things such a person might say in
that situation, they might say it looks like rain, or they might say the John
Clark of yesterday is not dead because at least one being today remembers
being John Clark yesterday, and there could be many more.

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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1hDkZ7TeGdmvE%3DZqwwUVN6BdqvE%3DUEt6Om3oepv6A-EQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: The strongest magnetic field ever detected

[Lawrence Crowell]

It has to be said that atoms in such magnetic field becomes something odd. 
Back in the 90s when I was working on orbital dynamics for the intelligence 
community I found myself working on a problem with the orbit of a highly 
charged object. Why was I looking at this? Well, I will defer from 
discussing that. A charged body in orbit around the Earth or any 
gravitating body with a magnetic field orbits on these spirals that hover 
over the magnetic poles. The charged mass bounces up and down on this 
spiral. In a classical setting this is not hard to understand and one has 
to solve the dynamical equation for *B* the magnetic field

*F* = q*v*×*B* - GMm*r*/r^3,

where numerical programming is convenient. 

If you quantize this these spirals becomes elongated lobes of electron 
shells. For extreme magnetic field these becomes stringy. The Lorentz force 
is not due to a potential function, so while it exerts a force it does no 
work. The Lorentz force is perpendicular to the displacement, which is an 
elementary physics way of thinking of this. I this way the electrons are 
not stripped off the atom. So any atom around a pulsar is in this bizarre 
configuration. 

LC
On Friday, September 11, 2020 at 7:39:45 AM UTC-5 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

> The strongest magnetic field ever detected was just found by a Chinese 
> astronomical X-ray orbital telescope, it is in a Pulsar called GRO 
> J1008-57. The Pulsar has a magnetic field of about one billion Tesla. By 
> comparison a hospital MRI machine has a field of about 2 Tesla, and the 
> strongest magnetic field humans have ever produced was 45.5 Tesla at the 
> National High Magnetic Field Laboratory at Tallahassee Florida in 1999; it 
> took 30 MW of power to run and nobody has been able to beat that 35 ton 
> magnet's record since then.
>
> Strongest magnetic field in universe directly detected by X-ray space 
> observatory 
> 
>
> 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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/5d810790-4dea-4ce9-9433-b66bf3708409n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 23:04, John Clark  wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 5:33 AM Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>>
>>>
>>> >> when
>>>
>>> something that would now take paragraphs to explain becomes intuitively
>>> obvious to everybody on a gut level people will say things in a language
>>> whose grammar is totally different from anything spoken by anybody
>>>
>>> living
>>>
>>> today. Early 21st-century speech will seem very archaic and naïve to
>>> them.
>>>
>>
>> > *There would be social and legal changes,*
>>
>
> That is the understatement of the millennium, of the last several hundred
> millennia actually.
>
>
>> > *but people's psychology, developed over at least hundreds of
>> thousands of years, would remain the same.*
>>
>
> If any being wishes to function and also to communicate after self
> duplication becomes commonplace then language would have to change
> RADICALLY because circumstances have changed to something different from
> anything they were even remotely like in the last few hundred thousand
> years since humans evolved. For an organism to remain viable radical
> changes in the environment require radical changes in behavior. If you're
> right and humans are hardwired in such a way that they are incapable of
> changing then the only alternative is to cease communicating, or cease
> functioning, or use genetic engineering to change the hardwiring.
>

You’re not giving an example of what people might say when the walk into or
out of duplication machines.

> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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/CAH%3D2ypXeVO9tKp%3DapgDmmuNxKJxYW9eVRzd7cwqudDkkohHWVA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: The strongest magnetic field ever detected

[smitra]

On 11-09-2020 14:39, John Clark wrote:

The strongest magnetic field ever detected was just found by a Chinese
astronomical X-ray orbital telescope, it is in a Pulsar called GRO
J1008-57. The Pulsar has a magnetic field of about one billion Tesla.
By comparison a hospital MRI machine has a field of about 2 Tesla, and
the strongest magnetic field humans have ever produced was 45.5 Tesla
at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory at Tallahassee Florida
in 1999; it took 30 MW of power to run and nobody has been able to
beat that 35 ton magnet's record since then.

Strongest magnetic field in universe directly detected by X-ray space
observatory [1]

John K Clark



Interesting! The physics in such strong magnetic fields is fascinating, 
see e.g. this article


https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0002442

written by Duncan, the astrophysicist who developed the theory of 
magnetars.


Saibal

--
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/a16cf425b7a35feb30a472ee5ca0b6a3%40zonnet.nl.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[John Clark]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 5:31 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:

> *>>>I gave you the answer for year, but it asks for distinguishing the 1p
>> and the 3p*
>>
> >> And that is absolutely positively 100% impossible because in a world
>> where self duplication is common place there is no such thing as *THE*
>> first person.
>
>


> *>That is equivalent to saying that when we undergo a self-duplication,
> and thus even just a brain transplant, we die.*
>

No, that would be equivalent to saying "there is no such thing as *A* first
person", and saying such a thing would be absurd. I know for a fact that I
am conscious therefore I know for a fact that* A* first person exists; I am
almost certain that I am not the only conscious being in the universe
therefore I am almost certain *THE* first person does not exist.


> >>> For both copies, “the first person” is the one in the mirror they see
>>> themselves in the city they feel to be in.
>>
>>
> >> Then I guess you don't think the Helsinki man of yesterday survived
>> because today there is nobody in Helsinki and the mirror there is blank.
>
>
>
> *> I don’t see how that follows. It would be like saying that John Clark
> is dead right now in all places he is absent. *
>

You are absolutely correct, saying that would be exactly like saying John
Clark is dead right now in all places he is absent; but then I'm not the
one who said "*For both copies, “the first person” is the one in the mirror
they see themselves in the city they feel to be in*".

*> You are also predicting that if you look at the schroedinger cat, you
> die.*
>

Somebody did indeed predict that but that somebody was certainly NOT John
Clark, because John Clark was NOT the one who said "*the first person” is
the one in the mirror they see themselves in the city they feel to be in*".


> *> OK. But none get the feeling of his doppelgänger in any direct way.
> They have become two persons, with distinct and unique first person
> experience, and both are the H-man. Personal identity is not transitive. *
>

At last I agree with you about something!

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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv01igmSQ%3DfFHvbKhf0%3DnT69GFqH93axpefFmkHR6tCTLg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[John Clark]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 5:11 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:

>> When self duplication becomes commonplace I think the English language
>> will need to change so much that what people will say would be
>> incomprehensible to an English speaker in the early 21st century when self
>> duplication was anything but commonplace.
>
>
> *> Then this should have happened since long, as you and me are already
> differentiate results from the first amoeba…*
>

Amoebas don't have a language and probably aren't conscious, my fellow
human beings certainly do have a language and probably are conscious.

 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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3bfbo1t6nZ41WMxAA3NUR2%3DkY8noTHK8t2EdCrf15b9Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[John Clark]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 5:33 AM Stathis Papaioannou 
wrote:


> >> when something that would now take paragraphs to explain becomes
>> intuitively obvious to everybody on a gut level people will say things in a
>> language whose grammar is totally different from anything spoken by anybody 
>> living
>> today. Early 21st-century speech will seem very archaic and naïve to
>> them.
>>
>
> > *There would be social and legal changes,*
>

That is the understatement of the millennium, of the last several hundred
millennia actually.


> > *but people's psychology, developed over at least hundreds of thousands
> of years, would remain the same.*
>

If any being wishes to function and also to communicate after self
duplication becomes commonplace then language would have to change
RADICALLY because circumstances have changed to something different from
anything they were even remotely like in the last few hundred thousand
years since humans evolved. For an organism to remain viable radical
changes in the environment require radical changes in behavior. If you're
right and humans are hardwired in such a way that they are incapable of
changing then the only alternative is to cease communicating, or cease
functioning, or use genetic engineering to change the hardwiring.

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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1e---QBH8LUPPbUOGZHRP%2BAdsgQ9x8iy0kdoE4d5iEGA%40mail.gmail.com.

The strongest magnetic field ever detected

[John Clark]

The strongest magnetic field ever detected was just found by a Chinese
astronomical X-ray orbital telescope, it is in a Pulsar called GRO
J1008-57. The Pulsar has a magnetic field of about one billion Tesla. By
comparison a hospital MRI machine has a field of about 2 Tesla, and the
strongest magnetic field humans have ever produced was 45.5 Tesla at the
National High Magnetic Field Laboratory at Tallahassee Florida in 1999; it
took 30 MW of power to run and nobody has been able to beat that 35 ton
magnet's record since then.

Strongest magnetic field in universe directly detected by X-ray space
observatory


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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3S6X3x5viQ2LMn3w1FruoLRS51Jjr-HOQ%2Bt2n593bTqA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 10 Sep 2020, at 21:41, John Clark  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 3:25 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
> mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> 
> wrote:
> 
> > When self duplication becomes commonplace I don't think the word "you" will 
> > exist anymore.
>  
> > Why not?  It still works where there are identical twins. 
> 
>  Now Brent be honest, do you really think that question deserves an answer?
>  
> > And duplicates of a person will differentiate almost instantly and diverge 
> > further with time.
> 
> Yes, and it is exactly precisely for that reason the personal pronoun "you" 
> will become ambiguous to the point of meaninglessness in a world that has 
> "you" duplicating machines.

If Brent’s biological duplication (the twin) does not open your eyes, note that 
we are already multiplied in arithmetic, so the word “you” should never 
appeared in your theory.

(And if you believe that a universal machine can distinguish a physical reality 
from the arithmetical reality without observation (by their experience only), 
then you believe in some magic incompatible with the the Indexical Digital 
Mechanist hypothesis.

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 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv20GL64sN_QPL%3DVhbJ%3DPLgJhDDVaeCnQkbtHZmDxbYZWw%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> .

-- 
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/9575870B-B6F2-4B2E-8783-D76789D1DBE7%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 10 Sep 2020, at 20:29, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/10/2020 3:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> My own feeling is like Nozick's, which is best expressed by the old 
>>> American statement: "Close enough for government work.”
>> 
>> OK. But that is utilitarianism. You cannot be serious on this, or you are 
>> mixing religion/moral/ethics with politics and the state, which should not 
>> be done (in a democracy). Justice needs truth (or the honest research of the 
>> truth), but truth cannot be declared to be juste at will, that would be 
>> wishful thinking.
> 
> It's not mixing religion/moral/ethics with politics and the state.  The 
> phrase means "It will serve.  Get on with things."  similar to "Perfection is 
> the enemy of the good.”

"Perfection is the enemy of the good.” Is true in the human practical affairs, 
but that is not relevant in metaphysics, where we reason from precise 
hypotheses to get testable predictions and refute theories. The closest 
continuer theory is wrong when we assume Digital Mechanism. If you bet Moscow 
because it is far closer to Helsinki than Washington, you will be in trouble, 
and also, you will prevent finding the Born Rule or the Mechanist corresponding 
one, at the start.

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 view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/03f1a58c-4efb-d0bb-dc32-112c7bf8ca07%40verizon.net
>  
> .

-- 
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/BC1D80A0-88C1-4712-87FC-A56CBEA98F53%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 04:25, John Clark  wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:51 PM Stathis Papaioannou 
> wrote:
>
> *>>> this is how people will talk. “I went through duplication, and I woke
 up in a little room.*

>>>
>>> >> I don't think so. When self duplication becomes commonplace I think
>>> the English language will need to change so much that what people will say
>>> would be incomprehensible to an English speaker in the early 21st century
>>> when self duplication was anything but commonplace.
>>>
>>
>> *> People will tell those who have not yet had the experience: “you will*
>> [,,,]
>>
>
> I don't think so. When self duplication becomes commonplace I don't think
> the word "you" will exist anymore.
>
> *> What do you think they will say?*
>>
>
> "I" think that when something that would now take paragraphs to explain
> becomes intuitively obvious to everybody on a gut level people will say
> things in a language whose grammar is totally different from anything
> spoken by anybody living today. Early 21st-century speech will seem very
> archaic and naïve to them.
>

There would be social and legal changes, but people's psychology, developed
over at least hundreds of thousands of years, would remain the same. I am
quite sure that people would say things like: "I walked into the
duplication room, fell asleep, then woke up in a different room. I was told
I would end up in New York or London, and I ended up in London. I then
talked to a copy of me who was in New York, and knew everything about me
until the point I walked into the duplicator." If you think they would say
something different, try to give an example.

-- 
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/CAH%3D2ypW06RCKc5J_by%2B0%3D6iwyGSR%2B0uxpiMxU8ORawnJ3ahhug%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 10 Sep 2020, at 15:07, John Clark  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 5:36 AM Bruno Marchal  > wrote:
> 
> >>> It has a perfectly clear referent,
>  
> >> If it were perfectly clear then why doesn't Bruno Marchal use the referent 
> >> in Bruno Marchal's thought experiments rather than a personal pronoun? 
> >> John Clark has been asking Bruno Marchal to do that for years but Bruno 
> >> Marchal absolutely refuses. 
> 
> >That is incorrect. I gave you the answer for year, but it asks for 
> >distinguishing the 1p and the 3p
> 
> And that is absolutely positively 100% impossible because in a world where 
> self duplication is common place there is no such thing as THE first person.


That is equivalent to saying that when we undergo a self-duplication, and thus 
even just a brain transplant, we die. Because we all  know *the* first person* 
we are, even after the WM duplication, the guy in W and the guy in M know 
perfectly who hey are, and know perfectly that they could not have predict in 
advance who they are feeling now. In Helsinki, reason prevents to predict that 
we will FEEL being two persons at once: indeed, in Helsinki you can predict 
with certainty that you (anyone doing the experience) will feel to be unique, 
and “the” refers to that unique person that we can only feel to be. The other 
copies are respectively doppelgänger to each other.



>  
> >> And as John Clark has been saying for years, if "you" is duplicated then 
> >> there is no longer such a thing as "THE first person" there is only "A 
> >> first person”.
> 
> > Exactly, and that is the reason why in Helsinki, the guy cannot have any 
> > certainty other that “W v M”, 
> 
> It's not just Helsinki, if self duplication is commonplace then the guy can't 
> be certain in Moscow or Washington or anywhere or at anytime about anything 
> as long as you keep talking gibberish like THE first person.

Just push a little bit that line of thought, and you will eliminate 
consciousness, first person, etc. 

You are also predicting that if you look at the schroedinger cat, you die.





> 
> > For both copies, “the first person” is the one in the mirror they see 
> > themselves in the city they feel to be in.
> 
> Then I guess you don't think the Helsinki man of yesterday survived because 
> today there is nobody in Helsinki and the mirror there is blank.


I don’t see how that follows. It would be like saying that John Clark is dead 
right now in all places he is absent. 



> I however think that Helsinki man has survived because today there are not 
> one but two people who remember being him yesterday.

OK. But none get the feeling of his doppelgänger in any direct way. They have 
become two persons, with distinct and unique first person experience, and both 
are the H-man. 

Personal identity is not transitive. The HM and the HW are both the H person, 
but the HM and the HW are different person.




> If I were the Helsinki man I'd say that's great, two is better than one.


That is why we reproduce biologically already. We are some billions, or more if 
you remember that we are mammals.

But the question is about predicting first person experience, independently of 
deciding who or what we really are, as long as we accept the “yes doctor” 
hypothesis.

It is a simple fact that after reiterating the duplication a great number of 
times, the vast majority of personal memories will be algorthmically 
incompressible, and that the copies (who does not “feel the split”) will admit 
they can’t predict their immediate future (the first personal future which 
subsist given that we have admitted that we don’t die).




>  
> > There are indeed two first person but each of them feel to be the first 
> > person
> 
> Then I guess you've changed your mind after all these years and now believe 
> the first person Helsinki man will see both cities because this is all about 
> the Helsinki man, so the fact that the Washington man will not see Moscow is 
> irrelevant. The Helsinki man is the Washington man and the Washington man is 
> the Helsinki man, but the Washington man is not the Moscow man.


That’s correct, and that is the reason why the Helsinki Man can predict with 
certainty that he will get a coffee cup in only once city, but without knowing 
in advance which one.

You see, no ambiguity, just first person indeterminacy. You confuse 1-p, 3-1-p, 
1-1-p, 3-3-p, etc. 

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 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2tg7%3DgEYXSiSRJOE%3D%2BukpzSMGxr8t%3D4zJQPGyLG0n_BA%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> 

Re: Probability in Everettian QM

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 10 Sep 2020, at 14:16, John Clark  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:57 PM Stathis Papaioannou  > wrote:
> 
> > this is how people will talk. “I went through duplication, and I woke up in 
> > a little room.
> 
> I don't think so. When self duplication becomes commonplace I think the 
> English language will need to change so much that what people will say would 
> be incomprehensible to an English speaker in the early 21st century when self 
> duplication was anything but commonplace.


Then this should have happened since long, as you and me are already 
differentiate results from the first amoeba…

Nature has used self-duplication since long. The sexual reproduction is a 
variant of it, and is defined in theoretical computer science by a double 
recursion.

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 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0UrJXbap5nqhY0WwTBc%2B%2BHG36C8h2AhHMUCAY-Kpgtfw%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> .

-- 
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/AF398842-0D82-4265-AE54-142A7459F441%40ulb.ac.be.