Jacques Mallah wrote:

>       No, I'm just a sane MWIer.  I have explained my views on this on
>previous occasions.
>       According to the standard MWI, the measure of a human is
>proprtional to the squared amplitude of the term in the wavefunction which
>that human is in.  As long as there is no killing, etc. total the measure
>is therefore conserved as a function of time.  
>       If the measure was not conserved, but grew exponentially, then
>later times would be very heavily favored, which is inconsistent with our

This is correct with the ABSOLUTE SSA. Not with the RELATIVE one.

>       My attempt to explain the situation is to take the measure to be
>proportional to the number of implementations of conscious computations.
>This first requires a definition of implementation, and that has been the
>roadblock.  The final step is to show that the number of implementations
>is proportional to the squared amplitude.
>       Quantum events, then, just cause the implementations to
>differentiate rather than creating new ones.  This is reasonable since
>each implementation should have slightly different boundaries to mark off
>where the formal states of the computation are in the space of
>wavefunction configurations.
>       Since the number of implementations is infinite and they are
>parameterized by continuous parameters, only infinite groups of them have
>any significance.  This is analagous to coloring a surface.  It does not
>matter if one point on a surface is colored, what matters is the *area*
>that is colored.  Measure is analagous to such an area.  It is
>quantifiable because just as two people have twice as much consciousness
>as one person, doubling the number of implementations would double the

I agree, basically. So I guess it is the absolute/relative point which
distinguish between us. The immortality distinction results.
Nevertheless I don't understand you when you say:

>       Quantum events, then, just cause the implementations to
>differentiate rather than creating new ones.

I guess you disagree with Q19 of Michael Clive Price's FAQ at
Q19 = "Do worlds differentiate or split?"


Reply via email to