Le 22-juin-05, à 19:50, Quentin Anciaux a écrit :
I have one more question about measure :
I don't understand the concept of 'increasing' and 'decreasing'
measure if I
assume everything exists.
Me neither. Especially when I accept, for the sake of some argument,
(Absolute Self-Sampling-Assumption) idea. If the measure is relative to
your current state/OM, then it makes at least as much sense than
Because if everything exists... every OM has a
successor (and I'd say it must always have more than one),
Perhaps. It depends of your definition of "OM", and of your
Let me tell you the "Lobian's answer": if I have a successor OM then I
have a successor OM which has no successor OM.
OK, I am cheating here, but not so much. As I just said to Stathis I
must find a way to convince people about the urgency of using the modal
good or bad OM, every OM has "good" successor and "bad" successor.
want to mean is that, I get 100% chance that at least one (I'd say
my futur selves will go in hell, and at least one (I'd say also many)
have great experiences. And this, whatever I do... because when I do
something, the universe split, and there are branches were I do other
I can't constraint the choice. So what is the meaning of increasing and
decreasing measure ? What is wrong in every OM has a successor in an
everything context ?
Here too I could give a precise answer, which is that every OM has a
successor, when looking at some absolute third person view, but that
that truth is not communicable by the 1-person observer ....
<sigh>. Have you bought the Smullyan's "FU" ? (Forever Undecided)