On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au>wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 06:58:15PM -0500, Jason Resch wrote:
> >
> > Nick,
> >
> > I think such cul de sacs exist only from third person perspectives.
>  E.g.,
> > the experimenter's view of what happens to the cat.  When considering the
> > perspective from the first person (cat) perspective, there are no cul de
> > sacs for a much simpler reason: The cat might be mistaken, dreaming, or
> even
> > an altogether different being choosing to temporarily experience a cat's
> > point of view.
> That is not what a cul de sac world means. It means a world with no
> possible subjective futures (ie you die in all futures).
I don't think it is possible to define personal discontinuation (death) in
terms of a local event or configuration that is setup in some corner of a

For instance, if the universe is infinitely big, one could recur infinitely
often in an infinite number of places.  Without taking into account what
happens in (in the past or future), one cannot say definitively that the cat
will never be resurrected.  In fact, one cannot rule
out resurrection without knowing what happens even in altogether different

Given this, it seems senseless to use the concept of "no cul de sac" in
regards to worlds.  In some places of some worlds a person either dies or
doesn't; but its not possible to set things up such that someone dies in all
their futures, without being able to control everything that happens
throughout all of reality.


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