2013/10/17 John Clark <[email protected]> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]>wrote: > > >> And I don't understand the difference between "first person >>> uncertainty" and plain old fashioned uncertainty. >>> >> >> > The difference is that from 3rd POV it is deterministic. >> > > As I've said many times, being deterministic and being predictable is NOT > the same thing. >
There is not *uncertainty* from the 3rd POV... nothing, zip, nada (both event happen) and it is fully deterministic. There is uncertainty from the 1st POV, and it is random. > Even if we restrict ourselves to just Newtonian physics something can be > 100% deterministic and still be 100% unpredictable even in theory. Even > with all the information in the world sometimes the only way to know what > something will do is watch it an see because by the time you've finished > the calculation about what it will do it will have already done it. > > > POV plays a role. >> > > It's not exactly a grand new discovery that point of view can play a role. > > > So as I said to you before, be consistent and reject MWI. If you accept >> assigning a probability of seeing spin up/down before measuring, you should >> accept the same for Bruno's thought experiment, or you must reject both >> > > I have absolutely no objection to assigning probability when it is > appropriate to do so, but I do object to using probability to assign > identity, because predictions, both good ones and bad, have nothing to do > with a feeling of self. > > > or look like a fool. >> > > In Bruno's thought experiment [YOU] walk into a duplicating chamber and > Bruno asks after the duplication, that is to say after you has been > duplicated, what is the probability that [YOU] will see this or that. When > John Clark asks "who is you?" Bruno responds that he could no more answer > that question than he could square a circle. But even though Bruno admits > that he doesn't know what he means when he says [YOU] he still demands to > know what [YOU] will see. So who's the real fool around here? > In MWI thought experiment, *you* (John Clark) measure the spin, and before doing so, *you* ask *yourself* what is the probability that *you* will see spin up... and John Clark says 50%... somehow John Clark will not ask who is *you* and proceed unlike with Bruno's thought experiment beside being the same thing, John Clark is thus not consistent. Quentin > > 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. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
