On 05 Nov 2012, at 19:41, John Clark wrote:

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> Again the same main 1-3 confusion.

I see nothing I can be confused about because the only point of view I can see is my own first person one, what your second or his third person point of view may be is pure speculation on my part and so I will say nothing about it.

We work with the comp theory, and ideal machine. The 1-views used are simple accessible memories in the brain or written in a diary.
And it is the purpose of the thread to dig on those notion.
We are no doing speculation, but we reason in a theory.

> You can only say that [...]

You? John Clark has been duplicated so who "can only say that", me or that fellow to my right who looks just like me?

Both of them after the duplication.

You? John Clark has been duplicated so who "can only say that", me or that fellow to my left who looks just like me?

Both of them after the duplication.

If we reiterate a great number of times the experience, we are allowed to make a sampling.

> John Clark would be certain that *a* John Clark would die a painful death, not that it will necessarily ever matter from your (the unique John Clark before the experience) future point of view

A future experience NEVER matters to the unique person occupying the present because its in the future,

That is a different issue, and is basically wrong.

but when the future becomes the present just before John Clark's last painful thought John Clark will remember being John Clark of the past.

> Look at AUDA

According to Google "AUDA" is either a investment firm, a Bedouin Arab leader, or a Latvian football club playing in the second- highest division of Latvian football. I don't see the relevance in any of them.

AUDA is for Arithmetical UDA. It is UDA but with the use of the mathematical definition of the pronouns, by using the only definition possible given by computer science, on ideally correct machines. It is part 2) of sane2004, although I use "interview" instead of AUDA. But it is the same. It is the purely math part of my investigation. The one where a part of physics is derived an the showing that QM confirms comp up to now. You confirm that you have not read the post, nor the paper, and that you have some prejudice on the whole field.

> Avoiding the use of pronouns there would conflate even more easily the 1-3 key distinction.

I couldn't fail to disagree with you less. What you really mean by "conflate" is to shine a bright light on your ideas to expose their errors in stark relief. Pronouns are supposed to be used just for convenience, instead of laboriously typing "Bruno Marchal" the pronouns "you" or "he" can be used. But sometimes even in everyday experiences without the huge complication of duplicating chambers pronouns can lead to ambiguity. We've all had the experience of reading a very convoluted sentence and then seeing at the end "and so I disagree with it" and not being certain what "it" refers to and thus being unsure if the writer agrees with you or not. Now if we introduce duplicating chambers pronouns are a billion times more dangerous. To say that "you have been duplicated" and then to ask what "you" will see feel or want is just begging for ambiguity and confusion.

No, because the "1-you", which has been well defined, can easily predict, by the comp assumption, that he is indeterminate about what he will feel, WHOEVER he feel to be after the experience. In Helsinki, with comp, he is certain (assuming comp + protocol) that he will FELL TO BE in only one place after the experience, and he is certain that any prediction of the type W & M, W, M, will all fail. Only "W or M" will be exact for both.

You give the feeling of faking to not understand what we are talking about.



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