On Wed, 23 Feb 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I do not buy the concept of objective reality, I do not
Then you are no better than a Copenhagenist. It's precisely the
fact that non-belief in objective
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The RSSA is not another way of viewing the world; it is a
category error.
I use the RSSA as the basis for calculating what I call the relative
probability, in this group the first person probability, or,
On Tue, 7 Dec 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Suppose there are two possibilities: you live in a universe where there
will be 100 billion people total, or in a universe where there will be
100 trillion people total, and a priori you think there is a 50-50 chance
which one is the case. You
On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
[JM wrote] [BTW I am getting tired of RS omitting the attribution]
^^^ Blame my email software. I almost always leave the .signatures in
to make it obvious who I'm responding to.
Since your
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
The measure of Jack Mallah is irrelevant to this situation. The
probability of Jack Mallah seeing Joe Schmoe with a large age is
proportional to Joe Schmoe's measure - because - Joe Schmoe is
independent of Jack Mallah. However, Jack Mallah is
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
[JM wrote]
Obviously you don't understand. With the ASSA, it is always
possible to find the conditional probability of an observation given a
suitable condition. Choosing a condition and asking a question about it
changes nothing about
On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
Then maybe I misunderstood you. A tautology is a term with redundant
parts, ie it is equivalent to some subset of itself. I took your
statement that ASSA is a tautology to mean that ASSA is
On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
I use the terms SSA, ASSA, RSSA only because others on the list
insist on using them. In my opinion the 'ASSA' is a tautology and not
an assumption, while the 'RSSA' is an error.
ASSA != SSA. ASSA makes explicit the sample set over which
I use the terms SSA, ASSA, RSSA only because others on the list
insist on using them. In my opinion the 'ASSA' is a tautology and not
an assumption, while the 'RSSA' is an error.
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
Now this implies that an individual's measure decreases the
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Jacques M. Mallah wrote:
Life will continue but with decreasing measure. Still it seems
that you can make a refutable prediction: namely, that the universe we are
in is not optimised for us to be here, but is optimised to give you a long
lifetime. Basically you
On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
[Jack wrote]
What I am trying to do is to look at the consequences of the
claims made by the quantum suicide camp. The claim is that consciousness
'flows into' possible continuations of oneself and is, in effect,
conserved as long as such
referring to
t0 |
|
t1 T / \ H
/ \
t2 / / \
| | \
t3 Y R B
Assume that all three branches occur (two copying events).
Gilles Henri wrote:
With the
On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you think this variant would work. Suppose that there are multiple
possible distinct universes, forming a set U of all possible universes,
and a probability measure P() defined over elements of U, which tells
how much contribution that universe
On 9 xxx -1, Marchal wrote:
Oh ! It could help me if you answer the following question:
Suppose you are right and you solve the implementation
problem (in your sense).
So you get a correctly implemented computer. This one is still
emulable by a Turing Machine, correctly programmed, OK ?
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Higgo James wrote:
So why don't we observe vacuum collapses, Jacques?
I guess it never occurred to you that the vacuum might be stable?
- - - - - - -
Jacques Mallah ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Graduate Student / Many Worlder /
On 31 xxx -1, Marchal wrote:
I have probably missed something (in the 10^9 episodes!), but I still
cannot figure out why should my measure decrease with time.
At least, unlike some q-immorters, you admit that you do not think
measure decreases with time.
At least with comp, it
On Sun, 25 Apr 1999, Gilles HENRI wrote:
But COMP is (if I understood it correctly)
a stronger hypothesis: it is that at some finite level, you could reproduce
or duplicate EXACTLY your conscious state, or at least you could simulate
it to an arbitrary degree of accuracy (which is already
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Gilles HENRI wrote:
(note: I wrote)
The point is that a human brain implements some digital
computations. An analog system is perfectly capable of implementing
digital computations; usually only for a certain set of initial
conditions. The basic unit which is
On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Gilles HENRI wrote:
A computer has a number of physical degrees of freedom
(physical entropy) enormously greater than the number of its computational
degrees of freedom (memory and processor size); that allows to reproduce
the same computational complexity with many
On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Nick Bostrom wrote:
The Self-Sampling Assumption (SSA), the idea that you should reason
as if you were a random sample form the set of all observers,
underlies many of the discussions we have had on this list. About
half a year ago I discovered some paradoxical
On 14 xxx -1, Marchal wrote:
OK, so you agree that a computationalist could, in case it is
technologically feasible, use teletransport to move herself.
Remember that the original is destroyed, and reconstituted elsewhere.
I guess you agree that if someone survives teletransport, she will
On 13 Mar -1, Marchal wrote:
Jacques M Mallah wrote:
Yes, that's why I've enjoyed my discussions with Wei Dai. My
problem is with what I see as the trivial errors that are so entrenched in
many of the opinions.
Could you be a little more explicit ? Could you give examples
Hello. Max, you haven't responded to the arguments I've made
against it. (e.g. http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/msg00287.html,
http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/msg00306.html,
http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/msg00313.html,
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 09:51:53AM -, Higgo James wrote:
Jacques, Darwin has a lot of work to do before I become a slave to my genes,
which is what you advocate. I don't say consciousness jumps magically.
Our consciousness, like anything, exists in the same form in very many sets
of
24 matches
Mail list logo
