On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 04:42:48AM -0000, Jason wrote:
> I agree that regardless of the creation or destruction of other 
> copies, there is no reason for there ever to be any effect on first 
> person experience, that means no funny feelings, no loss of 
> consciousness, etc.
> RSSA Proponents:
> Many-worlds implies there are always branched histories where an 
> observer survives to experience another observer-moment.
> ASSA Proponents:
> Observer-moments that find themselves as extremely and abnormally long-
> lived observers should be exceedingly rare.
> I fail to see how the above descriptions are mutually exclusive.  I 

These are not characterisation of the ASSA and RSSA. The one you label
RSSA is known as the "No cul-de-sac assumption". The one you label as ASSA
is a consequence of the ASSA, and some relatively minimal assumptions
on measure.

> The reason I started this thread was to discuss the possibility that 
> Many-Worlds is a property of this universe for purely ASSA reasons, I 
> see no reason for it to exist for any anthropic reasons, but due to 
> the exponential growth in observer moments defined by many-world 
> universes, it makes great sense.
> Jason

Occams razor would favour Multiverses for Anthropic Reasons.

I never really understood your point about the ASSA, as the relevant
*SSA for understanding what world we live in is the original SSA
(birth moment sampling) which both the ASSA and the RSSA satisfy.



A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia                                http://www.hpcoders.com.au

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 

Reply via email to