On 21 August 2017 at 09:49, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > > >> >>> 1-you >>> = Homemade Baby Talk. >>> >> >> > >> 1-you refer to your subjective, first person, experience. >> > > And > your subjective first person, experience > refers to the 1-you. And round and round we go. > > >> >>> But I know you love homemade acronyms too so perhaps you prefer HBT. >> >> >> > >> Ad hominem. >> > > But it's true, it is a undeniable fact that you do love homemade > acronyms and jargon. Sorry if you consider this predisposition of yours to > be rather embarrassing > > > >>>> >> >>>> Washington or Moscow, each with a probability of 1/2. >>>> >>> > > >> >>> That's the same thing you said BEFORE the duplication, >> >> >> > >> Indeed. I do the prediction lways before the experience. if not, it is >> not a prediction. >> > > After a coin flip I know a lot more and can say much more precisely > about > what the coin ended up doing than I could say before; > back > > then all I could could say is it will land heads with 50% probability, but > now after the flip I can say the coin landed the way it landed with 100% > certainty. That's a big improvement and I just want you to do the same > thing. > > You say before the experiment the best you > could > say is "Washington or Moscow, each with a probability of 1/2" but now the > experiment is over and with the benefit of all the new > > found knowledge you've gained from it I just want to know your new > improved answer to the question "What is the name of the one and only one > city I will end up seeing after I became two?". If your answer after the > experiment isn't better than the one made before then it wasn't a question > > and it makes no sense to > even > talk about probability > > AFTER the event. >
There are two people after the event, and each has his own answer about which one and only one city he sees, and whether he was correct in his prediction. Why does this make the question not a question? >> >>> now that the duplication Is long over is that STILL the best you can say >>> even now? >> >> >> > >> No, after the duplication, there is no more prediction. Only verification >> if my bet was correct or not. You can look at the detailed answer in >> previous post, >> > > I don't want a goddamn detained answer, the question > "What is the name of the one and only one city I will end up seeing after > I became two?" > > requires only a one word answer! And if nobody can ever know what the one > word answer is ever AFTER the experiment is over then it wasn't a question. > A string of words can be well formed and correctly follow all the rules of > English grammar and yet have no meaning, and sticking a question mark on at > the end doesn't help. > > >> >>> Regarding a coin, if the best we could say is "after the coin fell and >>> everybody observed how it landed it turned >>> out >>> it fell heads or tails with a probability of 1/2" >>> >>> then the very concept of probability would be utterly meaningless. >> >> >> > >> That is my point. >> > > I > f that was your point you made it well. You said that even AFTER the > experiment is over and even with the benefit hindsight you say the best you > could have told the Helsinki man > about what he ended up seeing > is "Washington or Moscow, each with a probability of 1/2" > , and that is utterly meaningless. > > >> >>> But we can do better than that, much better, we can say "it turned out >>> that after the coin was flipped in landed heads with 100% certainty" with >>> no need to add and any ifs ands or buts >>> >>> whatsoever. That's because "how will the coin land after it is flipped?" >>> is a real question with a real answer, but "what one city and only one city >>> will I see after I am no longer one but have become two?" is not a question >>> and thus >>> it >>> obviously has no answer >>> , not today not tomorrow not ever. >>> >> >> > >> You just rephrase the question in a strange way, >> > > I didn't make it strange, it's your thought experiment not mine. > > >> > >> but it is obvious that when we assume mechanism, the question makes >> perfect sense. >> > > Then now that it's all over and you know all there is to know you should > have a perfect one word answer to the question. So let's hear it! > > >> You know with certainty (given what we have accepted) that after pushing >> on the button, you (whoever you can possibly feel to be) will see only one >> city, and this without knowing which one in Helsinki. >> > > I'm not talking about Helsinki, that was BEFORE the experiment! I want > to know what new thing you've learned from the experiment now that it's > completed. I what to know what your new improved answer is. > > 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. > -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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 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.
