On Mon, Mar 19, 2012  meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

> I think we're arguing about whether duplication of persons provides a
> valid model of quantum uncertainty; at least I think that's what Bruno's
> argument tries to show.

Bruno claims he's found a completely new type of uncertainty that has
nothing to do with Quantum Mechanics or Godel-Turing style uncertainty, and
I don't buy it for one second.

> he just want to avoid identifying the Helsinki man as 'the real Bruno'.
> But suppose the transmission and reconstruction takes a year, or two.  Is
> the Helsinki guy dead for the interval?

The Helsinki Man is certainly not dead from his perspective, from his point
of view the preceding year occurred instantly and absolutely nothing
unusual happened to him, but rather it was the rest of the universe that
acted weird, everything except him suddenly and discontinuously jumped
ahead by one year while he went along just as before smooth as silk. And I
would maintain that in this matter it is only the perspective of the
Helsinki man that is important, the opinion that others may have on the
matter is not relevant, if the Helsinki man thinks he's alive then he is
because subjectivity is the most important thing in the universe, or at
least it is in my opinion.

> You're equivocating on "identical".

I don't think so.

> Of course I've seen many things that are identical in the sense that I
> can't tell them apart: U.S. coins of the same year and value for example or
> small red balls that table-top magicians use.  Magicians use such objects
> because, if you can't or don't see them momentarily then you can't tell if
> they've been switched.

Magicians can use objects that, while not identical, are similar enough
that when they are exchanged they cause no change in a consciousness. So
your example only strengthens my argument, the duplicating chamber need not
make copies as exact as the laws of physics allows for all I've said to be
true, a few million times less precision would probably still work just
fine. After all, what is of interest here is subjectivity not objectivity,
and the objects a stage magician uses are subjectively absolutely

> which of course is why you had to postulate a perfectly symmetrical room

The room only needs to be good enough that you the copy or you the original
can not perceive anything unsymmetrical. It need not be objectively perfect.

> and that's why Bruno considers two duplications (and annihilation of the
> guy in Helsinki) to avoid identifying an 'original' by continuity.

But again its only subjective continuity that matters and the "annihilated"
man has as much continuity as anyone, he walks into the chamber in Helsinki
and boom, there he is in Moscow and Washington nice and smooth with no gaps

>>If I found out I was the copy what should I do? I suppose I should morn
>> the death of John Clark, but how can I, I'm not dead. If I am the copy
>> would that mean that I have no real  past and my life is meaningless? Is it
>> important, or should I just burn the tape and forget all about it?
> >I'll tell you as soon as you tell me the probability that you'll be the
> guy whose gun misfires if you repeat the experiment.


  John K Clark

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