On 19 Dec 2013, at 18:29, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Jason Resch <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Bruno: The question is: is it enough correct so that you would
please us in answering step 4. If not: what is incorrect.
John Clark: (No answer, deleted the question)
I have not read step 4, however if it is built on the foundation of
the first 3 steps (and I can't think why it would be called "step 4"
if it were not) then I can conclude that one thing wrong with step 4
(I don't claim it is the only thing) is the previous 3 steps.
But you have not yet found a flaw in step 3. In your preceding post,
you have kept the 1/3 distinction correctly (which shows that you can
do that at times), but you have been wrong on the timing of the
probability question. It is asked to the Helsinki man, and not to the
copies. What we ask to the (all) copies is just to confirm or refute
the prediction made in Helsinki.
Bruno
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
