Roger, Don't you believe you already have eternal life. I do and I am not even Christian. Richard
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 6:37 AM, Roger Clough <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Bruno Marchal and all, > > Do you not realize that 1p far enough into the past (presumably accessible > to time travel), where your parents and past friends are still alive, > is a form of eternal life ? > > > [Roger Clough], [[email protected]] > 12/23/2012 > "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen > > > ----- Receiving the following content ----- > From: Bruno Marchal > Receiver: everything-list > Time: 2012-12-22, 08:09:59 > Subject: Re: Against Mechanism > > > On 20 Dec 2012, at 22:18, John Clark wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> You are asking about the present first person point of view of >>> >> someone, >> >> >> > NO. read the question: it is about a future first personal event. > > > That is totally false! The Helsinki man is informing you about his PRESENT > first person state of mind, he may be preoccupied trying to guess about what > his future state of mind could be but that doesn't change the fact that you > cannot communicate with the future Helsinki man you can only ask questions > to the present Helsinki man and regardless of the subject of his thoughts he > can only tell you about his present state of mind. >> >> >> Bruno Marchal has said, and John Clark agrees, that both the Moscow Man >> >> and the Washington Man are the Helsinki Man, and so assuming that the >> >> Helsinki Man believed the same thing and is rational, then the conclusion >> >> is >> >> obvious, the Helsinki Man will say that the Helsinki man will see >> >> Washington >> >> AND Moscow. >> >> >In the 3p view, > > > Yes, and as I've said before if 2 things are identical in the 3p they are > certainly identical in the 1p, although the reverse is not necessarily true. > >> >> > but the question is about the future 1p view > > > In a world with duplicating chambers there is no such thing as "the" future > 1p view. > > > Of course there is. There are two such future 1-view. The 1-view of the > M-man, and the 1-view of the W-man. If they don't exist, you would die, and > comp is false. The use "the" is just an emphasis on the fact that, although > there are two such view, they are felt unique by the experimenter. > > > > >>> For example: suppose the Washington Man said the Helsinki Man's >>> prediction in the past about a hypothetical first person point of view that >>> would occur in the future turned out to be wrong, would that mean that the >>> Washington man would no longer feel in his gut that he was the Helsinki Man? >>> Of course not! That's why to follow a chain of identity the way to go is >>> from the present to the past not from the present to the future. >> >> >But we have to do prediction to confirm or refute a theory on reality, >> > which is the present case. > > > Not with personal identity we don't! If you are like me and most people you > have made predictions about what you will do that turn out to be wrong, but > incorrect or not when that happens you still feel like you were the one that > made the prediction. > > > Exactly, and that is why if you predict W and M, both will rightly admit > having been wrong. > > > > >> >>> This is just obviously wrong. It is correct in the 3p picture, but the >> >>> question was about the 1p picture. > > >>> And that's the problem right there, THERE IS NO "THE" 1P PICTURE, THERE >>> IS ONLY "A" 1P PICTURE! >> >> > And? > > > And so in a world with duplicating machines asking about "the" future 1p > picture is as silly as asking how long is a piece of string because it > depends on the string. > > > Then QM without collapse is refuted at once. > > > > >> > It is not weird as it is only an indetermination on the person result >> > after a self-duplication. the math are easy to do, > > > It's not just the math, everything about it is easy; the one that sees > Washington is the Washington Man and the Washington Man is the one who sees > Washington. What more do you want to know about it? What more is there to > know? > > > The technic to predict the future when we are multiplied, like in > QM-without-collapse, or in arithmetic. > > > > > > > >> >> both remember being the Helsinki Man, so although different both ARE >> >> the Helsinki Man, >> >> >>> >>> > Exactly, and that is why the question makes sense. > > > So does the answer, the Helsinki man will see both cities. > > > In the 3p view, that's correct, but fail to answer the question asked. > > > > > >> > If he was asked on the 3p view after the duplication. > > > Apparently asking somebody something "on the 3p" is supposed to be different > than just asking somebody, but I have no idea how. > > > Take the QS as example: the most probable 3p outcome is the guy died. The > most probable experimenter 1p outcome, is "I stay alive". When > self-multiplication exist, the 1p and 3p difference play a big role, in both > comp and Everett QM. > > 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 [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
