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
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
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%
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
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
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
> 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.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at