On 25-Dec-01, Saibal Mitra wrote: > > Brent Meeker wrote: > >> On 25-Dec-01, Saibal Mitra wrote: >>> >>> Charles Goodwin wrote: >>> >>>> Or are you claiming that repeated quantum suicide attempts increase the >>> chances >>>> that you are a computer simulation? >>> Yes that is what I claim. >>> >>> That would only occur if there was some sort >>>> of cul-de-sac (assuming you *start* from a physical instantiation, at >>> least). If >>>> you are physically instantiated at some point in time, all physical >>>> instantiations must end in a cul-de-sac before you can 'travel' to a >>> universe in >>>> which you are a computer simulation. >>> >>> Why? If your brain were replaced by a digital one, you would still be > the >>> same person. If I made a digital version of you and let the biological >>> version of you live on, then there would be a 50% chance you would end > up as >>> the digital person. >> >> I'm not sure what to make of such statements. It seems to me there's a > 100% >> chance Charles would end up as both. Are you positing a supernatural soul >> that's *really* Charles and can only be in one of the two physical > 'brains'? > > Not at all. There are two identical ``souls´´. Of course there is a 100% > chance that you would be in either the real world or the simulation. I am > saying that if Charles could perform an experiment to find out whether he > was in the simulation or in the real world, there would be a 50% chance for > him to be in the simulation.
I guess I still find the question slightly incoherent. "...whether he was in the simulation..." invites the question, "To whom does 'he' refer?" Brent Meeker