## Advertising

Le Jeudi 10 Novembre 2005 19:48, GottferDamnt a écrit :I have another question: I know that with the quantum theory ofimmortality, the non-cul-de-sac conjecture involve that there arealwayssome branches where you can stay alive, but can you follow the samebranches for an eternity? For example, can you stay in a box (even ifitis not very probable) forever? It would be unlikely ^^ ! What aboutthatwithin Bruno's theory? TR.

`The non-cul-de-sac conjecture is more the decision of not taking into`

`account the dead end (which by comp exists everywhere). Tha fact that`

`there is always "no-dead-end" states is more a consequence of the comp`

`assumption (betting I'm some sound lobian machine).`

Quentin wrote:

Yes of course, if we consider that all possible "observer moment"could exist,then it follow that a tiny fraction of your consistent histories willfollowthe same branches for eternity(I have to say that I don't really knowwhat itmean to stay on the same "branche" (because I think that in factconsciousness is spanning over a lot/an infinity of almost identicalobservermoment), but it is of very low measure. Now, how can we know themeasure of abranche through time (what is time anyway ?)... I really don't know ;) Quentin

`I have also a problem with the expression "staying in the same`

`branche": you always split or differentiate on 2^aleph_0 branches. Do`

`you mean branches looking the same from the first person perspective?`

`Time is the first person perspective I would say. That can be shown`

`necessary when recast through the self-reference logic (G, G*) and`

`their intensional variant (S4Grz, the Z and X logics, ...). I could`

`explain with the modal logics).`

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