On 10 Jan 2014, at 01:10, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Brent,
This is precisely why it is impossible to exactly clone a mind.
Then comp, in the very weak sense of the existence of a substitution
level, is false, but then the mind is infinite and reality is
infinite, contradicting your claim that reality if finite.
Bruno
Because you are always trying to hit a moving target. That was
included in what I meant by saying the histories would not be the
same.
Saying somebody is the 'same' person from day to day is just loose
common speech using an imprecise definition which isn't really
germane here.
As you point out everybody's thoughts and states of mind are always
changing....
Edgar
On Thursday, January 9, 2014 5:01:48 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/9/2014 1:15 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 January 2014 09:20, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
Terren,
I understand very well that's what the 'yes dr.' scenario is but
it's an impossibility to be exactly 'me' for the reasons I pointed
out. You can't come up with a hypothetical scenario which isn't
actually physically possible and make a correct deduction about
reality on that basis.
The no-cloning theorem means that if the correct substitution level
is the quantum level (or below), then it is physically impossible
for us to create a digital copy of a brain that creates the same
state of consciousness, in which case the above objection is valid.
However, it isn't clear that this is the substitution level. Max
Tegmark has suggested that the brain is essentially a classical
computer (rather than quantum) which may in principle put the level
above the quantum. If he's right, then making a copy of a brain at
the right level becomes possible, albeit beyond present technology,
and thought experiments may legitimately use that idea (because
it's possible in principle). Personally I don't agree, I think that
any copy made above the quantum level isn't guaranteed to be the
same, while a quantum recreation is guaranteed by the laws of
physics to be identical. So assuming the substitution level is the
quantum level cuts out a host of possible objections.
But a lot depends on what you mean by "the same". As Terren points
out, no one is exactly the same from minute-to-minute or day-to-
day. They are similar enough that we denominate them the same
person, even Gabby Gifford is still "the same person" to a pretty
good approximation.
Brent
--
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.
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.
