On 02 Jul 2012, at 22:17, John Clark wrote:

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012  PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> The profound thing is that in Helsinki he does not know which one he will feel to be, so he is confronted with an indeterminacy

Suppose I send the same identical Email to both you and to Craig at the same identical time, you look at your copy and think " when John hit the send button on his computer he could not have predicted that I would get this copy of the Email and not the one Craig got,

? It is the same. Leading to same experience, except one is (predictably) lived by me, and the other one 'experience, not mail) is lived by Craig. I don't see any indeterminacy here.



so it's a example of indeterminacy and all sorts of profound conclusions can be drawn from that fact". What makes this ridiculous is that the 2 Emails are identical and thus completely interchangeable. In the same way the man sent to Washington and the man sent to Moscow are also identical and thus completely interchangeable,

Before their differentiate, and the question is ask about the result of the differentiation.



and they will remain that way until the environments of Washington and Moscow, being different, change the two so they are different and no longer interchangeable. So "first person indeterminacy" is just the result of the unpredictable nature of what goes on in Washington and Moscow.

Nothing in W and M, relevant in the duplication experience, is unpredictable in W and M.



> Learning that the other is there will not make you suddenly being that one.

Why would I need to suddenly become that other fellow for a logical man to conclude that the predictions written in that diary was 100% correct??

You did not write any prediction (on the 1-pox, as asked) in the diary. You wrote the two outcomes, which is hardly a prediction.





> you have restricted your prediction on the third person view on the 1-views.

I am in Washington and feel like I'm in Washington and only in Washington and that is just what I predicted would happen.

Read yourself. You did not write "W", nor "M", but both "W" and "M". That can be seen as a correct prediction on the 3-view (including the possible 1-view) but not on the 1-views themselves, as asked.


If that's not a "1-view" what is?

No. It was two 1-views.




> But that is just not answering the question asked.

The answer is 42

<sigh>



but I can't figure out what the question is or why what was written in that diary is not a successful prediction.

To predict head and tail is not a prediction of what you will see when throwing a coin.





>> In physics we say there is indeterminacy and the meaning of that is clear

> This meaning is terribly debated since its inception.

That is entirely incorrect. The meaning of physical indeterminacy has always been crystal clear, it's the truth or falsehood of it that has been debated; but when you say "first person indeterminacy" I don't even know what you're talking about.

You said it yourself. The one in W is only in Washington. How can he be satisfied with having written "1)" and "2)" in the diary?

You persist in ignoring that the question concerns the 1-views.

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.

Reply via email to