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

Reply via email to