Bob Hearn wrote (from [EMAIL PROTECTED] question):

>I asked Tegmark what he thought about the idea that one could view 
>life as a quantum suicide experiment, in the sense that if it is at 
>all possible that I will be alive in, say, 100 years, then I will 
>experience this - by definition, I won't experience the branches in 
>which I'm not!  This could mean everyone is immortal in their own 
>world.  Tegmark did not agree.

But I do agree. I have even shown that a minimal platonistic assumption
together with mechanism (the doctrine that I'm finitely descriptible)
entails a similar form of immortality. I have also developped the
quantum suicide idea in my 1988 and 1991 paper. (ref. in my thesis

I also derive in the thesis a Quantum Logic from the (godelian-like)
arithmetisation of the idea that "by definition, I won't experience 
the branches in which I'm not".

More about Mechanist or Quantum immortality, related to the idea that
Everything Exist (but then what is a thing?) can be find in
the everything list discussion at 

Not all everythinger agrees with such form of immortality (to be sure).

I'm not quite sure I *like* the idea but I don't believe it is easy
to logically escape it when you accept either QM-without-collapse, 
or just Digital Mechanism.

See also James Higgo web page on that question:

About [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s original question:

>Can an observer really decide if the Copenhagen interpretation is 
>false by performing a quantum suicide experiment as proposed by 
>Tegmark (See )?

I think that if a CopenhagenQM repeats quantum suicides, and
survives, then he will either become an Everett fan or he will
become a quite a-la-von-Neumann solipsist (believing he is the 
only one able to reduce the wave packet!).


Reply via email to