On Jan 27, 12:24 pm, Stathis Papaioannou
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> William Vandenberghe writes:> On Jan 25, 3:50 am, Russell Standish <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 03:54:32PM -0500, John M
> wrote:> >> > > PS I still would appreciate to be directed to a short text
> explaining the essence of ASSA (RSSA?). JIt is in my book. Here is the
> relevant excerpt:> >> > \section[ASSA vs RSSA]{Absolute vs Relative Self
> Sampl\-ing Assumption}> >> > In the course of a lengthy, and at times heated
> debate between Jacques> > Mallah and myself, it became clear we were always
> arguing from> > disparate positions\cite{Mallah-Standish}. At the heart of
> our> > difference of opinion was how the strong self sampling> >
> assumption\index{self sampling assumption!strong|emph} should be> > applied.
> Jacques Mallah assumed that each observer moment had an> > absolute positive
> measure, and that our current observer moment is> > selected at random from
> that distribution.> >> > Since I accept the TIME postulate,\index{TIME
> postulate} only the> > birth moment is selected at random, according to the
> self sampling> > assumption. Thereafter, each observer moment's measure can
> be> > determined {\em relative} to its predecessor by means of Born's> >
> rule\index{Born rule}> > (\ref{proj-prob}). Arguing with this notion of
> observer measure, first> > person immortality follows provided the no
> cul-de-sac conjecture\index{no cul-de-sac conjecture} is> > true.> >> > The
> Everything List adopted the term {\em Absolute Self Sampling> >
> Assumption}\index{self sampling assumption!absolute|emph} to> > refer to
> Mallah's use of strong self sampling, and the {\em Relative> > Self
> Sampling Assumption}\index{self sampling assumption!relative|emph} for the
> version I use. Since this> > debate took place, other debates have taken
> place between members of> > the ``absolute'' camp, which includes such
> names as Jacques> > Mallah,\index{Mallah, Jacques}> > Saibal
> Mitra,\index{Mitra, Saibal} Hal Finney\index{Finney, Hal} and the
> ``relative'' camp which includes> > Bruno Marchal,\index{Marchal, Bruno}
> Stathis> > Papaioannou, and myself.> >> > \index{Papaioannou,
> Stathis}\index{Standish, Russell}> >> > Both of these ``camps'' appear to
> have internally consistent pictures.> > The fact that I'm not currently
> experiencing childhood, is for me> > strong evidence that the ASSA is an
> incorrect application of the> > strong self sampling assumption.> >> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------->
> > A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)> >
> Mathematics > > UNSW SYDNEY 2052
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Australia
> http://www.hpcoders.com.au> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------->
> > I think you can add me to the ASSA camp :)> > How does the fact that
> you're not experiencing childhood provide> evidence that ASSA is incorrect,
> as chances of experiencing childhood> or adulthood are both significant so I
> don't see why that would rule> out ASSA ... I kind of expected a different
> definition for RSSA as this> definition does not even solve any of the crazy
> paradoxes ASSA has ...> Well, anyway, time to look up the time postulate
> :)Suppose for simplicity that there is only one world: you live your life
> from birth to death and that's it. God reveals to you that you will live to
> be 100, but on your 50th birthday he will create a zillion copies of you
> which will all run in parallel for one minute and then all but one of the
> copies will be instantly destroyed. This means that almost all of your
> measure will be contained in that one minute on your 50th birthday. You can
> add variations to this thought experiment: God planned this before you were
> born; God will not decide to do this until you are 45; God will wait until
> the eve of your 50th birthday and toss a coin to decide whether he will make
> the copies or not; God does not tell you of his decision and you have to come
> up with a method to test whether he makes the copies or not. I claim that it
> will be impossible to notice anything unusual happening at any point in your
> life as a result of God's action or inaction. The first minute of your 50th
> birthday will last exactly one minute and will feel exactly the same as the
> preceding and the following minute. What do you think the ASSA predicts you
> will experience? Can you design a test to see what God is up to if he doesn't
> tell you? Stathis
> Papaioannou_________________________________________________________________
> Live Search: Better results, fasthttp://get.live.com/search/overview
Your replys are really difficult for me to read, something seems to go
wrong in their formatting.
ASSA predicts you are most likely to be thinking that you are 50, and
if any random consciousness thinks he is 50 years of age, he will be
correct in zillion/(zillion+99) cases, but there is no way to actually
know to know this no ... The real question is what happens if an
infinite number of copies are created, then ASSA states you will
actually be thinking you are 50 for sure, and RSSA may avoid this
paradox in this case ... That is the paradox I was referring to and
there are similar paradoxes which are not avoided by the above
definition RSSA sampling your birth moment.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
