On 18 Feb 2014, at 19:52, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> if Mr. he is the fellow who is experiencing Helsinki right now
then the correct prediction would be Mr. he will see neither
Washington NOR Moscow.
> Simple calculus show that this prediction will be refuted by both
copies.
Bullshit! Both copies will have equally vivid memories of being Mr. he
We agree on that, and we agreed this means that both copies are, from
their 1p view, survivors. Both can say I am the H-guy, like I can say
today that I am the guy having answered your post of last week.
and neither is experiencing Helsinki right now, therefore Mr. he
sees neither Washington nor Moscow.
So, this is my first post to you, despite I remember having sent other
post?
You are gravely irrational, and contradict your own terms. If Mr he
sees neither W or M, then he died, and then comp is false. We also
died each time we measure a spin, or anything. In AUDA this is a
confusion between []p and []p & <>t.
You get the 3-1 view, and seems unable to come back in your bodies
after the button pushing. You leave the body, and never come back.
> Or comp is false
Fine, then "comp" is false. And now that we both agree that "comp"
is false there is no need for either of us to ever use that word
again.
OK. you use ~step-3 -> ~comp is false, so you agree that comp -> step
3. So please move to step 4, whose question can only clarify to you
the 1p/3p distinction that you omitted up to now.
Or you believe we have refuted comp. That would be a gigantic
discovery, but it is unfortunately only your traditional fake (I
think now) confusion between the 1p and 3p pov.
> we are both copies, in the 3p, but only one of them, in he 1p view
That depends entirely on who the hell Mr. we is. Bruno Marchal is
addicted to pronouns.
Pronouns does not introduce any problem, when you agree that after the
duplication we are both copies, in the 3p view, and only one of them,
in the 1p view. I am addicted to the precision needed to move on. You
are addicted to irrelevant point to mask you absence of argument, I
think., and this absent of *your habit to forget the precisions
introduced.
> and everyone who can read a diary and distinguish "W" from "M" can
understand the argument.
Apparently not. Haven't you ever wondered why your colleagues don't
agree that you've made a world class discovery? Well this is why.
Which colleagues? If you know a scientist having trouble with this,
give me a name. I have never met someone stopping at step 3. I have
only heard about non convinced philosophers, but they have never
accept to meet me, or even to reply to a letter. It is only bad
politics and I think you are just doing defamation, which illustrates
again your lack of argument.
I am happy you think it is a world class discovery, but let us be
modest, it is a reminder that the mind-body problem is not solved, and
that "science" has not decided between Aristotle and Plato. The
discovery (the thesis) is in the math part: that machines have a non
trivial intrinsic quantum physics/logic associated with them through
self-reference.
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.
