On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> > You do have agree that the three people are the same H person. But he is > duplicated and become the HW in W and becomes the HM in M. > You were correct when when you said "he is duplicated", therefore while in H any question of the form "what will he...?" is meaningless because "he" is duplicated and the personal pronoun is ambiguous after that. > > > The H in Helsinki is no more there, so to confirm the prediction, we have > to ask both HW and HM, and both say that the prediction "W v M" was > correct, in both the 1p views, > So if they both agree and they are both correct then there must be only one answer to the question. So what one city do both W and M agree that H ended up seeing in the first person, Washington or Moscow? > > > and that "W and M" is correct from the 3p views but incorrect from the > 1p-views, which was the one asked to predict in Helsinki. > That's all very nice but it doesn't answer the question I asked, what one and only one city did H end up seeing? Your entire proof is built around the idea that a correct prediction cannot be made in Helsinki, but for that to work after the thought experiment is all over you've got to tell us what the correct prediction turned out to be so we can see that the correct prediction was not made. So what would the correct prediction have been, M or H? If you can not clearly and unambiguously answer that very simple question then the entire thing is nonsense because there is no way to tell if the correct prediction was made or not. >> >> So you tell me, what one and only one city did H end up seeing, W or M? > > > > > > W, and only W for the H guy finding himself in W. > > > M, and only M for the H guy finding himself in M. > OK. > > Both agree that "W or M" was correct > No, they don't agree on that at all. One says W saw W and H saw W. The other says M saw M and H saw M. The one thing they both agree on is H saw W *AND* M. > > None claims suddenly to have the first person experience of feeling > themselves being in two cities at once. > That has no relevance on the question asked. The question was what cities will H see, if both are H then H will see both cities. Where is this failed prediction you keep talking about? >> >> And yes both say they are in one place and one place only, but if both >> also say they are H then which one should be believed, W or M or both or >> neither? > > > > > Both. > Fine. If both say they are H and one says H is in W and one says H is in M and you believe both then the answer to the question "what cities will H be in?" is rather obvious. > > > > both confirm "W v M" (exclusive "or"), and both refutes "W & M" > Neither can confirm or or refute "W v M" by themselves. W can say that H sees W but W can say nothing about H seeing M, Mr. W knows nothing about M, to find out about H seeing that you'll have to ask Mr.M. > > > that part of the argument is understood by nine year old children. > Nine year old children are not noted for their critical thinking skills, that's why nine year old children "understand" things that just aren't true. John K Clark -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
