> -----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 yourself. Charles