On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Subjective probability depends on the amount of information, or lack of
>> it, the person involved has; and if Many Worlds is correct then all
>> probabilities are subjective. If you told me nothing about the machine and
>> just said walk into the chamber and I did so and found myself in Moscow I
>> would have no way of knowing that there was another John Clark in
>> Washington, nor would I have any idea why of all the cities in the world
>> you chose to transport me to Moscow, I would not even know that a reason
>> existed.
>>
>
> >Well say you knew there was a 50% chance it would duplicate you and a 50%
> chance it would transport you.
>

So a coin would be flipped and if it was heads then Jason Resch would
simply allow the duplicating machine to do it's work and John Clark would
remain in Helsinki and John Clark would go to Washington, but if the coin
was tails then one second after the machine finished its work Jason Resch
would put a bullet into John Clark's brain in Helsinki. If John Clark knew
all of this beforehand John Clark would conclude there is a 100% chance
that John Clark will go to Washington and a 0% chance John Clark will
remain in Helsinki.

>
>>  >>> as it brings too close to first person indeterminacy for your
>>> comfort.
>>>
>>
>> >> Well of course I'm uncomfortable with it, most people are, most people
>> want to know what the future will hold but we don't; and that's all "first
>> person indeterminacy" is, a pompous way of saying "I dunno".
>>
>
> >It's more than simple ignorance though.  Even with perfect knowledge you
> cannot know.
>

John Clark knows with certainty that if something (like seeing Washington)
causes John Clark to turn into the Washington Man then John Clark will see
Washington and if something (like seeing Moscow) causes John Clark to turn
into the Moscow Man then John Clark will turn into the Moscow Man. Not deep
but true. So it all boils down to uncertainties in external environmental
causes, and "first person indeterminacy" is just a pompous way of saying "I
dunno" about what changes the external world will cause in John Clark.


> > Even if you are God you cannot know.
>

Which should give a hint that the question makes no sense.


>  > Tell me whether you disagree with the following and if so why:
> You open the door to emerge from a duplication chamber, observe the
> skyline and find it includes the Kremlin.  The experimental setup says your
> duplicate in the other city found the skyline included the Washington
> monument.  One of you saw the Kremlin and became the "saw the Kremlin man"
> and the other saw the Washington monument and became the "saw the
> Washington monument man".  Through the duplication and observance of
> something different, each duplicate has acquired the subjective feeling of
> observing a random unpredictable event.
>

The subjective feeling would be depended entirely on the individual
involved , I'm only a expert on John Clark and John Clark would say he saw
the Kremlin because he's the Moscow man and he's the Moscow man because he
saw the Kremlin and he did not see the Washington monument because then
he's be the Washington man. And he's not.

  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