On 29 May 2012, at 22:26, Jason Resch wrote:

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>wrote:To see this the following thought experience can help. Some guy wona price consisting in visiting Mars by teleportation. But his statelaw forbid annihilation of human. So he made a teleportation to Marswithout annihilation. The version of Mars is very happy, and theversion of earth complained, and so try again and again, andagain ... You are the observer, and from your point of view, you canof course only see the guy who got the feeling to be infinitelyunlucky, as if P = 1/2, staying on earth for n experience hasprobability 1/2^n (that the Harry Potter experience). Assuming theinfinite iteration, the guy as a probability near one to go quicklyon Mars.Bruno,Thanks for your very detailed reply in the other thread, I intend toget back to it later, but I had a strange thought while readingabout the above experiment that I wanted to clear up.You mentioned that the probability of remaining on Earth is (1/2)^n,where n is the number of teleportations.

`Not really. I pretend that this is the relative probability inferred`

`by the person in front of you. But he is wrong of course. Each time`

`the probability is 1/2, but his experience is "harry-Potter-like".`

I can see clearly that the probability of remaining on earth afterthe first teleportation is 50%, but as the teleportations continue,does it remain 50%?

Yes.

Let's say that N = 5, therefore there are 5 copies on Mars, and 1copy on earth. Wouldn't the probability of remaining on Earth beequal to 1/6th?

You cannot use absolute sampling. I don't think it makes any sense.

While I can see it this way, I can also shift my perspective so thatI see the probability as 1/32 (since each time the teleport buttonis pressed, I split in two). It is easier for me to see how thisworks in quantum mechanics under the following experiment:I choose 5 different electrons and measure the spin on the y-axis,the probability that I measure all 5 to be in the up state is 1 in32 (as I have caused 5 splittings),

OK.

but what if the experiment is: measure the spin states of up to 5electrons, but stop once you find one in the up state.

`That is a different protocol. The one above is the one corresponding`

`to the earth/mars experience.`

In this case it seems there are 6 copies of me, with the followingrecords:1. D 2. DU 3. DDU 4. DDDU 5. DDDDU 6. DDDDDHowever, not all of these copies should have the same measure. Theway I see it is they have the following probabilities:1. D (1/2) 2. DU (1/4) 3. DDU (1/8) 4. DDDU (1/16) 5. DDDDU (1/32) 6. DDDDD (1/32)I suppose what is bothering me is that in the Mars transporterexperiment, it seems the end result (having 1 copy on earth, and 5copies on mars) is no different from the case where the transportercreates all 5 copies on Mars at once.

This is ambiguous.

In that case, it is clear that the chance of remaining on Earthshould be (1/6th)

Yes. In that case.

but if the beginning and end states of the experiment are the same,why should it matter if the replication is done iteratively or allat once? Do RSSA and ASSA make different predictions in this case?

`RSSA has to be applied. Your first protocol is faithful, isomorphic,`

`to the experience I was describing. Te second is not.`

OK? Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.