On Wednesday, February 26, 2014 3:18:50 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Jason, > > This initially interesting post of course exposes fundamental flaws in its > logic and the way that a lot of people get mislead by physically impossible > thought experiments such as the whole interminable p-clone, p-zombie > discussion on this group. > > First there is of course no physical mechanism that continually produces > clones and places them in separate rooms, nor is there any MW process that > does that, so the whole analysis is moot, and frankly childish as it > doesn't even take into consideration what aspects of reality change > randomly and which don't. Specifically it's NOT room numbers that seem > random, it's quantum level events. > > If anyone is looking for the source of quantum randomness I've already > provided an explanation. It occurs as fragmentary spacetimes are created by > quantum events and then merged via shared quantum events. There can be no > deterministic rules for aligning separate spacetime fragments thus nature > is forced to make those alignments randomly. > > But sadly no one on this group is interested in quantum theory, only > relativity, and far out philosophies such as 'comp'. > > Edgar > heh heh heh I love this place. It's like walking through an eccentric street market where traders call out their wares "GETCHYOUR P-TIME 2 for 1 logico-computational really real structure today only" "Assuming comp only, that's right comp only. Theology but done like science. Madam you are ugly but I will be sober in the morning. You there, you reek of not-comp, get lost. Ah sir, did you like the dreams? Same again?" "GETCHOR P-TIME..,."
> > > If you read carefully it assumes a single real present moment self that > has the experience of being in one room or the other. > > On Wednesday, February 26, 2014 8:49:03 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: >> >> I came upon an interesting passage in "Our Mathematical Universe", >> starting on page 194, which I think members of this list might appreciate: >> >> "It gradually hit me that this illusion of randomness business really >> wasn't specific to quantum mechanics at all. Suppose that some future >> technology allows you to be cloned while you're sleeping, and that your two >> copies are placed in rooms numbered 0 and 1 (Figure 8.3). When they wake >> up, they'll both feel that the room number they read is completely >> unpredictable and random. If in the future, it becomes possible for you to >> upload your mind to a computer, then what I'm saying here will feel totally >> obvious and intuitive to you, since cloning yourself will be as easy as >> making a copy of your software. If you repeated the cloning experiment from >> Figure 8.3 many times and wrote down your room number each time, you'd in >> almost all cases find that the sequence of zeros and ones you'd written >> looked random, with zeros occurring about 50% of the time. In other words, >> causal physics will produce the illusion of randomness from your subjective >> viewpoint in any circumstance where you're being cloned. The fundamental >> reason that quantum mechanics appears random even though the wave function >> evolves deterministically is that the Schrodinger equation can evolve a >> wavefunction with a single you into one with clones of you in parallel >> universes. So how does it feel when you get cloned? It feels random! And >> every time something fundamentally random appears to happen to you, which >> couldn't have been predicted even in principle, it's a sign that you've >> been cloned." >> >> Jason >> > -- 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.
