On 08 Feb 2013, at 17:54, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Jason Resch <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> there is a single result in Bruno's experiment, John K Clark sees
Washington and Moscow.
But under MWI you agreed you see the photon hit the left or the
right plate, not the left side and the right side. So which is it?
Yet more confusion and for exactly the same reason, those God damned
personal pronouns.
H = Helsinki where the person is read and annihilate. M is for Moscow,
and W is for washington (the cities or the experience of feeling to be
in the cities, according to the context).
We have agreed that:
- the M-guy is the H-guy.
- the W guy is the H-guy
- The M-guy is not the W-guy.
No problem because pronouns are indexical, and thus modal notions, on
which typically the Leibniz identity rule don't applied.
We know by comp that the H-guy will survive. The H-guy knows comp, and
so knows that the two computerized version s, that is the M-guy and
the W-guy , will not have direct access to the memory of their
respective doppelganger, and so that whoever the H-guy will become, it
can only be felt to be in one city, and that it has two be W or M.
The experience, when done, we can get confirmation. If the H-guy
predicted "W or M", then the W-guy and the M-guy can compare the
statement "W or M" in their diaries (which has been multiplied by
definition of first person), then they look at the city, and the W-guy
see W, which makes W or M true (by elementary logic). Etc.
John K Clark sees the photon hit the left AND the right side of the
plate, however John K Clark has been duplicated so the John K Clark
who sees the photon hit the left side of the plate sees the photon
hit the left side of the plate and the John K Clark who sees the
photon hit the right side of the plate sees the photon hit the right
side of the plate. In the same way John K Clark sees Washington AND
Moscow although the Washington John K Clark sees only Washington and
the Moscow John K Clark sees only Moscow.
If it is in the same way, it justifies the same use of probability.
The only difference then is that in the quantum the 3p duplication is
the 3p quantum superposition, and in comp it is the amoeba type, or
computer type of classical duplication (a read of code followed by a
reconstitution).
It is crucial, as this shows, before MGA that to use correctly a
physical laws to predict a first person experience (like seeing an
eclipse) we have to assume the physical universe is little to apply
the laws, if not, we have to take into account the probabilities of
having extension in the universal dovetailing, or in some long enough
universal dovetailing.
Physicalist must bound the physical universe, to keep the brain mind
identity thesis they use implicitly in applied physics.
Then MGA suggests this does not work either, unless some magic is put
in the notion of matter.
Bruno
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
