On 26 February 2014 19:31, chris peck <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Liz > > *>> I meant changed from our everyday definition, in which we normally > assume there is only one you, which is (or is at least associated with) > your physical structure. Which we generally assume exists in one universe.* > > We lose that definition just by stepping into the realm of MWI don't we? > Its not as if we can have use of it in MWI until we want to argue that we > will always see 'spin up'. > > MWI forces upon us either the complete abandonment of any notion of > personal identity over time, or the equal distribution of it through all > the branches in which 'we' appear. > > Yes indeed. However we do cling on to our "apparent identities" even if we do believe the MWI is correct. For example I expect to go to work tomorrow, rather than unexpectedly being declared Empress of the Universe and never having to lift a finger again. I think we all know what happens once the MWI is assumed. The rest is just arguing over terminology. -- 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.
