On 02 Apr 2015, at 19:12, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>> A thought experiment is not needed to realize there is a
difference between "I" and "you".
> It ias moe about the difference between the 3-you
In other words "he".
> and the 1-you.
In other words "I".
> Like, the 3-you are in both M and W, but the 1-you are in only M
or W.
It would be wise if Bruno Marchal were less preoccupied with putting
numerals before "you" and gave a little more thought about what that
personal pronoun is supposed to mean. Does "you" mean John Clark the
Moscow Man or does "you" just mean John Clark? It makes a
difference, a very very big difference, and that's why John Clark
says that the English language will need a major overhaul when
matter duplicating machines become common (and that will be about an
hour after they become technologically possible).
>> And other than show that The Moscow Man aka the man who sees
Moscow will turn out to be the man who sees Moscow aka The Moscow
Man I can't figure out what you think you've proven.
> A non quantum first person indeterminacy. The step 4 asks if such
indeterminacy is the same if we add different delays of
reconstitution in the reconstitution in M and W.
And that's exactly why I haven't read step 4. Before I worry about
if "such indeterminacy" changes under various conditions I need to
know what the hell sort of indeterminacy you're talking about, and
despite reading your stuff for years you still haven't been able to
make that clear.
Imagine the iterated duplication, the average history in the diaries
obtained contained histories like
W (I was unable to predit that), W again! Would it be always W? M. Oh
I did not predict that, let us sump up, my hisytory is HWWM
[•••]
Let us sum up: HWWMWWWMMWMMMWWWMWMMMMMWWMWMWMMM .... Hm, I don't find
anyway I could have use to predict that.
I don't see the difficulty. By comp, you know that you will not die,
by comp, you know that you will not feel yourself in both place, and
by the protocol, you know that both will get the coffee, but cannot
predict which one, despite there will be one among the option {W, M}
(assuming comp, the protocol and the defaut hypothesis.
I don't see what is not clear with that. Nobody grasp where you see a
difficulty. The indeterminacy is the one described in the memories or
diaries of the average persons at the end of the experience.
If you repeat the experience a big number of time, the probability
that you will see W is given by the usual integral of the gaussian
e^(x^2) with the normalization constant. In that protocol. French
statisticians called that "épreuve de Bernouilli". You get the same
with the quantum coin, and in that case the probabilistic feature is
isomorphic, despite a different origin (quantum superposition and self-
duplication).
And the step 4 question is: should we take another distribution, of
those first person experience, if we add a delay of reconstitution in
Moscow?
Bruno
John K Clark
> and the Theaetetus' definition of knowledge
I don't think that those working on cutting edge scientific
problems in 2015 will be helped much by reading a book written in
369 BC by an author who thought the Earth was the center of the
universe and the 7 planets ( Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter Saturn, the
Sun and the Moon) were fixed to 7 crystal spheres and the rest of
the universe, the stars, was pasted on the inside of a 8th sphere.
?
!
> Clearly you have not read the Theaetetus,
Nor do I intend to.
> as it does not mention astronomy.
But Plato, the author of Theaetetus mention astronomy Timaeus and it
the Republic and he advocates a cosmological theory that has been
obsolete for 2000 years, even Ptolemy with his epicycles was better.
Do you really think that scientists working on string theory would
be helped by reading such crap?
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
