On 6/30/2012 12:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Jun 2012, at 21:20, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> You said yourself that the first person cannot be defined. How could we
verify
that prediction? Except by feeling to be one of the W and M reconstituted
person.
And from their points of viex, the prediction of being in both place is
simply refuted.
Refuted?? As I said before if you really had complete information then you could make 2
predictions:
1) I Bruno Marchal will write in my diary "I Bruno Marchal am now in Washington and
only Washington".
2) I Bruno Marchal will write in my diary "I Bruno Marchal am now in Moscow and only
Moscow".
Afterwards both diaries can be shown to anyone who is interested proving that there was
no indeterminacy and the prediction is confirmed to be completely correct.
But from the 1-pov, we know in advance that those two prediction are incompatible. So
you can make one more which is "1) OR 2)".
I think it's "1) AND 2)".
Things become paradoxical only if you make the assumption that there can only be one
Bruno Marchal, therefore the assumption must be untrue.
Things become contradictory when you confuse 1 pov and 3 pov, leading to "1) and 2)"
which is non sense.
The assumption is not that there is only one Bruno Marchal, but that all those Bruno
Marchal, whoever they are will still each feel to be only one of them. "Oh I am the one
in Moscow, and not the one in Washington, and I was unable to predict that fact, unless
using a "or".
Suppose you predict "I will be in Washinton." Then the Bruno in Washington will be right
and the Bruno is Moscow will say, "Oh, I was wrong."
Brent
> You have a machine with some button, and you are asked to make a
prediction on
the immediate personal outcome of a simple experiment.
Right, and the prediction is easy to make and it is perfect.
1) or 2). But that leads to the indeterminacy.
> you sill confuse 1 and 3 views.
You keep repeating that over and over like a mantra, but there is a possibility it is
you that is confused.
It is up to you to show this, but, here again, you deny that after the duplication,
whoever you will be, will recognize that he was not able top have predicted with
certainty the particular outcome. This can only be "I will be in such city", and this
will be refuted by the one in the other city. With comp, we agree that there are both
"bruno marchal", and so the prediction was wrong. It was a selection in disguise.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ <http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/>
--
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.
--
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.
