> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jacques Mallah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> I've explained that in other posts, but as you see, the idea is indeed
> mathematically incoherent - unless you just mean the conditional effective
> probability which a measure distribution defines by definition. And _that_
> one, of course, leads to a finite expectation value for ones's observed age
> (that is, no immortality).
Although I have other objections to the quantum theory of immortality, I still don't
see how the sampling argument refutes it.
Because (as I've said elsewhere) you don't know what a typical observer is. If the QTI
is correct then a typical observer moment may
*well* be someone who is 10^32 years old wondering why all the other protons have
decayed except the ones in his body. But you have
no way to find that out *except* by reaching that age yourself, because it's very very
very very (keep typing "very" for another
couple of weeks) unlikely that you will meet up with a typical observer who isn't