On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 at 3:23 am, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> >>> >> >>> Without the duplicating machine after it's all over you can say >>> "Yesterday I shouldn't have said there is a 30% chance event B will happen, >>> yesterday I should have said there is a 100% chance event B will happen", >>> but if personal pronoun duplicating machines are used then "you" couldn't >>> say that. And that's not equivalent. >>> >> >> > >> If you are one of the copies experiencing event B, you can say that, had >> you known, yesterday you should have said there was a 100% chance of event >> B happening. >> > > No, Mr. B can't say that because the question wasn't about what Mr. B > will see (and everybody correctly predicted that Mr. B will see event B > anyway) the question was about what Mr. Yesterday will see. Saying Mr. > Yesterday will see B happen with 100% certainty is the truth but NOT the > entire truth, Mr. Yesterday will also see A happen with 100% certainty > because Mr. Yesterday has been duplicated, that's what people duplicating > machines do. And that means today there will be 2 people, not just Mr. B, > who remembers yesterday. > > Not everything is > > unitary, that is to say summing up all the probabilities of the > > possible > > outcomes of a event don't always add up to 100%. If I slice a orange in > half and put the pieces in 2 boxes there is a 100% chance there is a orange > object in box A and a 100% chance there is a orange object in box B. > > >> > >> However, you could not have known, because what each copy experiences is >> irreducibly random. Not even an omniscient oracle could instil in a person >> undergoing duplication knowledge of the future which would turn out correct >> for each copy. >> > > I'm not a > omniscient oracle > but even I can say > which would turn out correct for each copy > . Mr. A will see A and Mr. B will see B. What more is there to say? What > exactly have I failed to predict? And by the way, if a > omniscient oracle > can't answer a question that can only be because it wasn't a question. > The prediction that not even the oracle could make is "which event will I see after the duplication?". It is a valid question because I understand it, others on this list understand it, and even animals at a primitive level understand it. The question has a definite answer after the duplication: "I see A", or "I see B", depending on which copy is speaking. It does not have a definite answer before the duplication because of the irreducible randomness, but this does not make the question meaningless. > -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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 firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.