--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/2/11 Jack Mallah <[email protected]>
> > And if your measure were to drop off dramatically overnight, it is
> > equivalent to saying that many _more people_ woke up in your bed today as
> > compared to the number of people who will wake up in your bed tommorrow.
> >
> > Which is equivalent to saying that, for all practical purposes, you will
> > probably die overnight. And that is the point.
> >
> I don't think so, the point is that there is still someone who will wake up
> in the bed tomorrow... as long as the measure is not null this is true, and
> that's what count for the argument to be valid.
There are some people who will, but relatively few. That is what counts for QS
to be invalid.
> So what you are saying is that at some point the measure fall to be strictly
> null... and that needs an argument from your part.
No, I never suggested it is zero. It doesn't have to be.
> Also you did not answer the question about the realness feeling of observer
> B... he has twice less measure according to you, does it feel less
> alive/real/conscious ?
I answered that previously. Measure affects the commonness of an observation,
not what it feels like.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
