On first blush, it would seem to be irrelevant to the fact that there
are possible histories in which the second law is not found to hold.
All the atom and rifle apparatus does is eliminate the living subject
in those branches where the decay occurs, leaving the subject alive in
only the unlikely fluke branches where no decay is detected. It must
be the case that the the question of whether or not the decay takes
place is independent of the scientist making his quietus.

On Apr 18, 11:10 am, "Telmo Menezes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >  > entropy is increasing as normal
> >  > because of the preparation and maintenance of the apparatus needed for
> >  > the experiment.
> >  > Do you think this makes sense?
> >  I am not sure I understand. I do agree with Brent Meker's comment
> >  though. If you agree with him, take his answer as mine (hope Brent does
> >  not mind).
> I don't think I was clear enough, but Russell's rephrasing a few mails
> ago was excellent.
> Have a great weekend,
> Telmo Menezes.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to