On Wed, Nov 14, 2012  Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

>> If he's a devout Muslim he believes he will go to heaven with 77 virgins
>> when he pushes that button, but as I said I really don't care what he
>> believes will happen, I care about what will happen.
>>
>
> > That was my point. What happen does not depend on the beliefs.
>

Then why in the name of all that's holy do you keep going on and on about
what the man expects to happen? What the Helsinki man expects to happen
depends entirely on the particular man involved. The Muslim will be very
surprised after he pushes the button when he doesn't see 77 virgins that he
was so certain he would see. I would not be at all surprised to see what I
see after I push the button. And even though you make the exact same
predictions I do nevertheless you say you would be surprised to see what
you see after you push the button, apparently you would be surprised to
find out that you were correct.

You keep looking at this backward and trying to establish a chain of
identity from the present to the future but that's never going to work,
you've got to look from the present to the past. I know for certain that I
am the John Clark of yesterday because I remember being him; if the Many
Worlds theory is true then I'm not the only one who was John Clark of
yesterday and some of them are now experiencing things that the John Clark
of yesterday would say were astronomically (but not infinitely) unlikely,
some are now experiencing vastly different things than I am now, but that
doesn't make me or them any less the John Clark of yesterday.  I am the
John Clark of yesterday from my viewpoint, and the John Clark who was just
elected Pope is the John Clark of yesterday from his viewpoint, and the
John Clark who decided to become a rodeo clown is the John Clark of
yesterday from his viewpoint. As for the John Clark of yesterday himself he
has no voice in any of this because he is no longer around.

And I know nothing for certain about the John Clark of tomorrow, I don't
even know if he will exist.

>> he is not the only Helsinki man because YOU HAVE BEEN DUPLICATED, and
>> that means the 1P view has been duplicated too
>>
>
> > As seen from the 3-views on the 1-views. But not as seen by the 1-views.
>

Who's "1-views"? Find somebody after the experiment who complains "my view
was not duplicated"! I dare you, show me!

>> and that means the 1P view from the 1P view has been duplicated too, and
>> that means the 1P view from the 1P view from the 1P view has been
>> duplicated too....
>>
>
> >As seen each time from some 3-view, but that is not what is asked.
>

So even after a infinity of iterations you still think there has not been
enough peeing and you can still factor out a p.  Well where the hell is it?

>> There is nothing in those diaries, nothing about the bodies and no third
>> party description that I failed to predict.
>>
>
> > Indeed, but you fail to predict the first party description
>

Using a word like "the" implies there is only one first party description
and of course that is untrue because YOU HAVE BEEN DUPLICATED. And before
you start peeing I should tell you that I don't know what a 3p of a 1p is,
much less a future 3p of a 1p.

> like if by some magic, you are all the copies at once, which would
> contradict comp.
>

I don't care if it contradicts "comp" or not, I'm not its advocate and
apparently know next to nothing about it. You keep telling me that "comp"
implies all sorts of loony screwy things stuff that is clearly untrue, so I
can only conclude that whatever "comp" means I don't believe a word of it.

And the Helsinki man being all the copies is only a contradiction if you
look at things through the wrong end of the telescope, its perfectly
logical if you look from the present into the past.

> After the pushing on the button, nobody is in helsinki.
>

Correct.

> But the helsinki man survived in W and M,
>

Correct. And I note with pleasure that you said "and" not "or".

> where both copies agree they are in once city
>

Correct.

> and that they could not predict which one in advance.
>

That depends on who's doing the prediction, I could make the correct
prediction while the Muslim could not and would be surprised when he
doesn't find his 77 virgins; but of course a bad prediction will not
destroy his identity. The Muslim Helsinki man may be surprise to find
himself in Washington and the Muslim Helsinki man may be surprise to find
himself in Moscow but both remember being the Muslim Helsinki man so both
are him, and predictions, good or bad, have nothing to do with it.

Bad predictions are made all the time but that doesn't mean the thing
making them ceases to exist, just look at Romney and the Republican party
of the USA.

>> you are still confused by the fact that "I" is no longer singular
>> because I HAS BEEN DUPLICATED AND SO HAS ALL OF I'S VIEWPOINTS.
>>
>
> > Obviosuly not from the 1p perspective.
>

Obviously?! If duplicating your body and your brain as perfectly as Mr.
Heisenberg allows does not duplicate your consciousness FROM ANY
PERSPECTIVE then there must be a way to distinguish between the two. How is
that done?

I've got to say that your comments like the above make me want to pull my
hair out. Yes you say, I understand that I the Helsinki man am now the
Moscow man AND the Washington man. Yes you say, I understand that I have
been duplicated. Yes you say I understand that now I was one but now I am
TWO. You say you understand all that, and then you ask "but which ONE am
I?". AHRRRRR!

>> even if the Helsinki man was Bruno Marchal, even he made the correct
>> prediction. Bruno Marchal predicted that 2 people will feel to be the
>> Helsinki man and Bruno Marchal predicted that nobody will be experiencing
>> Helsinki anymore because the body there has been destroyed, and Bruno
>> Marchal predicted that both people who feel like the Helsinki man will be
>> experiencing one and only one city
>>
>
> > I ask to evaluate the chance, for the Helsinki man, to find itself in W
>

100%

> or in M.
>

100%

> he knows that he will survive in the usual sense, and that he will feel
> to be in only once city
>

That's what he'll believe if he's free of superstition and thinks clearly,
and he will also believe that "he" will no longer be singular because HE
HAS BEEN DUPLICATED; if he doesn't think clearly he will expect other
things to happen when he pushes that button. But we're talking about
questions of identity and in that it doesn't matter a hill of beans how
good or bad the Helsinki man is at predicting, all that matters is who
remembers being the Helsinki man.

You keep looking through the wrong end of the telescope, you've got to look
from the present to the past not to the future, there may not even be a
future for you, but there was certainly a past you and you are him, the
fact that there may be others who are also the past you, that is to say
others who remember being you yesterday, in no way changes your identity,
you are still Bruno Marchal.

>> The answer is that the Washington man goes to Washington and the Moscow
>> man goes to Moscow. Where is the indeterminacy?
>>
>
> > In the mind of the helsinki man, before pushing on the button,
> concerning his chance to feel to be the one in W (or M).
>

You have said the Moscow man is the Helsinki man AND you have said that the
Washington man is the Helsinki man and I agree with you 100%; so if the
Helsinki man is confused about what will happen when he pushes that button
he's not thinking clearly, but that's OK, it won't effect what actually
does happen.

>> the answer to the Helsinki man's question is that he, the Helsinki man,
>> will survive in both Moscow AND Washington from the Helsinki man's
>> viewpoint.
>>
>
> > He might know that he will survive in both city,
>

He'll know that if he's smart, if he's not smart he won't know that but it
doesn't matter, he'll still be fine because survival is a matter of
remembering not predicting.

> but he knows that the question is asked about the future 1p-view,
>

The future 1p-view of the Washington man will be that he is the Helsinki
man and the future 1p-view of the Moscow man will be that he is the
Helsinki man and future the 1p-view of somebody experiencing Helsinki does
not exist because nobody will be experiencing Helsinki in the future. You
wanted to know about the future 1p of the Helsinki man, and there are only
3 people involved in your thought experiment and I described the 1p  of all
of them FROM THEIR OWN 1P POINT OF VIEW, FOR ALL OF THEM. What more is
there to do?

> From the 1p view, he will never feel the presence of a split.
>

I know.

> he pushes on a button, and then do a self-localization,
>

In other words the environment causes a change in him and the two exact
copies of the Helsinki man are not exact anymore and so become separate
people although both retain a equal right to call themselves the Helsinki
man, they have a equal right to claim to be the answer to the question
asked yesterday "what will the future 1p of me the Helsinki man be?".

And I'm getting tired of peeing.

John K Clark

-- 
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