On Sunday, March 16, 2014 1:10:19 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Mar 2014, at 17:31, meekerdb wrote: > > > On 3/16/2014 12:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> That's correct, but we assume usually "classical" quantum > >> mechanics. Then, even if GR digitalizes the access to futures, it > >> seems to me that QM will still provide the rooms for immortality > >> (not necessarily a good news). Then, in such reasoning, QM uses > >> comp, and comp by itself leads to many forms of immortalities, if I > >> can say. > > > > But does comp lead to immortality from *every* state? Are there no > > cul-de-sac worlds? > > For the ideally correct machine, there is no cul-de-sac world *from > the first person point of view". >
If there isn't already, there needs to be some fiction about Buddhist comp-believers trying to escape immortality. -- 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/d/optout.
