Le 28-mai-05, à 14:32, Saibal Mitra a écrit :


I'm actually still with the ASSA. I agree that if there is no cul-de-sac, you can always redefine an observer moment by including the information that he has survived a suicide experiment. But I would consider that observer
moment to have a lower measure than the 'previous' one.

OK, thanks. Now if I am correct you should not assume comp.


Also, if you take
the first person relative measure serious, then you have to deal with
transitions between different persons. Time evolution in both classical and quantum mechanics of an isolated system will yield any state if you wait
long enough. So, you will evolve into me (and everything else).

Perhaps.

Now you can
cut away these states just like the unconscious states, but since the total number of OMs that you can consider to be 'you' is finite you then end up
with an absolute measure over your 'reference class'.


Right. But with comp the relative measure from one OM is based on all comp histories going through that states. We should not measure the OM by its finite description, but from relative consistent extension point of view. Most cannot be distinguished from the OM, but still their existence and the measure can be inferred indirectly like in Everett (or directly like with the interview of the Lobian Machine).

Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


Reply via email to