Re: That stupid diary

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​ > In a post you agreed with principle 1: > Principle 1: if the guy in Helsinki is assured that the event X will be > statified/realized at both W and M, then P(X) = 1. > ​Probability is a measure of confidence, so ​

Re: That stupid diary

On 09 Aug 2016, at 19:24, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​I am still waiting for an explanation about your two recent posts which contradicted themselves. ​What are you talking about?​ In a post you agreed with

Re: That stupid diary

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > ​> ​ > I am still waiting for an explanation about your two recent posts which > contradicted themselves. ​What are you talking about?​ ​> ​ > The first person remains singular for both copies. ​Yes, and BOTH

Re: That stupid diary

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 9 August 2016 at 03:27, John Clark wrote: > > > ​ >> ​>> ​ >> And as I've explained several times MWI does NOT have the same problem. >> Before *you* perform the 2 slit experiment it would

Re: That stupid diary

On 08 Aug 2016, at 19:27, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 Telmo Menezes wrote: >​>​ Is this really that difficult to comprehend? If computationalism is true​ ​then the machine will be able to make 2 copies that are identical to each other in every way and

Re: That stupid diary

On 9 August 2016 at 03:27, John Clark wrote: ​And as I've explained several times MWI does NOT have the same problem. Before *you* perform the 2 slit experiment it would NOT be gibberish to ask* you* "After the experiment what do *you* expect to see?", because both before

Re: That stupid diary

On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 Telmo Menezes wrote: > > >> ​>​ >> Is this really that difficult to comprehend? If computationalism is true >> ​ ​ >> then the machine will be able to make 2 copies that are identical to >> each other in every way and will remain identical until the

Re: That stupid diary

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:49 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Telmo Menezes > wrote: > > >> > >> I am asking if you think that, for computationalism to be true, the >> diaries of the duplicates must be equal even after the

Re: That stupid diary

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: ​> ​ > I am asking if you think that, for computationalism to be true, the > ​ ​ > diaries of the duplicates must be equal even after the duplication > ​ ​ > event. ​Only if the environments ​the 2 are in are also

Re: That stupid diary

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 7/31/2016 1:48 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > I would agree but Bruno wouldn't, according to him there is something about >> me that a physical machine can't duplicate, Bruno is clear as mud about >> what >> that

Re: That stupid diary

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 9:32 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Telmo Menezes > wrote: > > >> We make a copy of you. [...] >> >> >>> > >>> > >>> OK stop right there! Bruno says >>> "Nothing can duplicate a first person view

Re: That stupid diary

On 7/31/2016 12:32 PM, John Clark wrote: > ​f​ or comuptationalism to be true, then the ​ ​ future diary must also be identical? ​I don't know what that means, identical to what? I'm saying that​ computationalism ​ is true if and only if a physical machine can duplicate

Re: That stupid diary

On 7/31/2016 1:48 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: I would agree but Bruno wouldn't, according to him there is something about >me that a physical machine can't duplicate, Bruno is clear as mud about what >that something is but apparently it's important. The future cannot be duplicated. Don't you

Re: That stupid diary

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: ​>> ​ >> ​But there is nothing in the laws of physics to prevent somebody else >> ​from having those exact same memories. > > > ​> ​ > At the level of macroscopic bodies there is. The somebody else can't > occupy the same

Re: That stupid diary

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > >> We make a copy of you. [...] >> >> > > >> ​> ​ >> OK stop right there! Bruno says >> ​ ​ >> " >> *Nothing can duplicate a first person view from its first person point >> of​ ​view, with or without

Re: That stupid diary

On 7/30/2016 7:25 PM, John Clark wrote: ​O​ n Sat, Jul 30, 2016 Telmo Menezes >wrote: ​> ​ You have a set of memories ​ about your past that we can refer to as your "diary". ​But there is nothing in the laws of

Re: That stupid diary

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 4:25 AM, John Clark wrote: > O > n Sat, Jul 30, 2016 Telmo Menezes wrote: > >> > >> You have a set of memories >> >> about your past that we can refer to as your "diary". > > > But there is nothing in the laws of physics to

Re: That stupid diary

On 31 July 2016 at 12:25, John Clark wrote: > ​OK stop right there! Bruno says > "*Nothing can duplicate a first person view from its first person point > of view, with or without computationalism. It just does not make any sense. > It duplicates only the 1-view in the 3-1

Re: That stupid diary

​O​ n Sat, Jul 30, 2016 Telmo Menezes wrote: ​> ​ > You have a set of memories > ​ > about your past that we can refer to as your "diary". ​But there is nothing in the laws of physics to prevent somebody else ​from having those exact same memories. You say that diary

Re: That stupid diary

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 6:42 PM, John Clark wrote: > For some reason Bruno takes great stock in a written diary "Diary" refers to a set of memories of the past that one recognizes as genuine, independently of how they are recorded. Bruno's argument does not rely on giving

Re: That stupid diary

to their own.Thanks. -Original Message- From: John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com> Sent: Sat, Jul 30, 2016 3:48 pm Subject: Re: That stupid diary On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 3:36 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List <everything-list@g

Re: That stupid diary

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 3:36 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: Do you have a reason why or how, hypothetically, speaking, that some > magical computer cannot duplicate everything about you? ​No, and magic is not required.​ > ​> ​ > Are you a

Re: That stupid diary

you, like a file gets restored to a database? -Original Message- From: John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com> Sent: Sat, Jul 30, 2016 12:42 pm Subject: That stupid diary For some reason Bruno takes great stock in a w

That stupid diary

For some reason Bruno takes great stock in a written diary in his thought experiment, but that evidence is worthless unless the identity of the writer can be unambiguously established after all the duplications and all the visits of various people to various cities is over. But Bruno says that as