On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:52:25PM -0500, meekerdb wrote:
> >Standish, and weighted by the universal prior, giving more weight to
> >being a baby than an adult.
> Is that assuming that QM uncertainty increases to the future but not
> the past:?
> Brent

In QM, the state evolves unitarily, which conserves total
probability. However, not all observations are compatible with being
an OM of the person of interest (ie the observer dies in some
branches). Consequently, the total measure of observer moments must
diminish as a function of OM age, roughly given by the observed 3rd
person mortality curve. After 70-80 years, the total measure diminishes
rapidly, but not to zero (assuming no cul-de-sac).

Hence my statement - the measure must be biased towards being a baby.



Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to