>Jonathan Colvin writes:
>> That's putting it mildly. I was thinking that it is more 
>likely that a 
>> universe tunnels out of a black hole that "just randomly" happens to 
>> contain your precise brain state at that moment, and for all 
>of future 
>> eternity. But the majority of these random universes will be 
>precisely 
>> that; random. In most cases you will then find that your immortal 
>> experience is of a purely random universe, which is likely a 
>good definition of "hell".
>
>But it's not all that unlikely that someone in the world, 
>unbeknownst to you, has invented a cure; whereas for a 
>universe with your exact mind in it to be created purely de 
>novo is astronomically unlikely.
>
>Look at the number of atoms in your brain, 10^25 or some such, 
>and imagine how many arrangments there are of those atoms that 
>aren't you, compared to the relative few which are you.  The 
>odds against that happening by chance are beyond 
>comprehension.  Whereas the odds of some lucky accident saving 
>you as you are about to die are more like lottery-winner long, 
>like one in a billion, not astronomically long, like one in a 
>googleplex.

I'd say considerably more than one in a billion for a lifespan of even a
thousand years. But we are talking *immortality* here (surviving even the
heat death of our local universe). At that point the odds must be getting
googleplexian... 

>Especially if you accept that it is possible in principle for 
>medicine to give us an unlimited healthy lifespan, then all 
>you really need to do is to live in a universe where that 
>medical technology is discovered, and then avoid accidents.  
>Neither one seems all that improbable from the perspective of 
>people living in our circumstances today.  It's harder to see 
>how a cave man could look forward to a long life span.

I thought QTI applied to *any* observer, cave men included. I suppose even a
cave man can look forward to long life if a UFO lands and gifts him the
technology for life extension.

>I should add that I don't believe in QTI, I don't believe that 
>we are guaranteed to experience such outcomes.  I prefer the 
>observer-moment concept in which we are more likely to 
>experience observer-moments where we are young and living 
>within a normal lifespan than ones where we are at a very 
>advanced age due to miraculous luck.

Agreed.

Jonathan Colvin


Reply via email to