On 9/25/2013 10:06 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be
> The first person indeterminacy is a ten lines reasoning, usually
And it's the obvious stuff that has destroyed many a mathematical proof or philosophical
edifice. You make a big deal about duplicating chambers and what city you end up in and
make all sorts of mystical conclusions from it; but all it comes down to is the fact
that different data streams (like one coming from Washington and another from Moscow)
will result in different conclusions (like I am in Washington or I am in Moscow) when
the calculation is concluded. But no doubt I am confusing the first person view of the
second person view of the third person view with the second person view of the first
person view of the third person view once removed.
It just boils down to: if you can be duplicated (i.e. you are simply your physical,
classical body) then there's no certain answer to which person you will be in the future.
Scott Aaronson dismisses the problem by concentrating on the idea that duplication must be
duplication of the quantum state, so that the no-cloning theorm applies.
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 post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.