On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >>> *The 1p-you is defined by the sequence of memories personally >>> accessible* >> >> > >> That does not define a unique object if the world contains 1p-you >> duplicating machines as it does in your thought experiment , > > > >*How could that be possible?* That is a very odd question for a scientifically minded person to ask, very odd indeed. If you believe that is not possible then you must believe the most important part of us is supernatural and can not be duplicated because it is not amenable to the scientific method or even to logic. In other words you believe in the soul. If I believed in crap like that I’d burn all my scientific books get some saffron robes and join a monastery or something. > *> After iterating 10 times the duplication, each 1p person is unique, * They would only be unique if the duplication machine was bad or if the environments they were in was different and there was sufficient time for then to diverge. > *> with its definite history in the diary (like 1000110110). * If I can be duplicated then 1000110110 can be too, hell technology is good enough to to that right now. That’s why the entire diary business you keep talking about is so dumb. >> therefore it is nonsensical to ask what one and ony one thing will "you" >> see or feel. If you claim the 1p-you can not be duplicated then there must >> be some subjective difference between the two, but we know there is not >> because they can't ever tell which one they are, the copy or the original. > > > > *They can each tell who they are among the 2^10.* I don't see how. In fact if the duplicating machine was working properly and the environments were the same then there wouldn’t even be a “they”, there wouldn’t be 2^10 conscious beings, they would all be identical so there would only be one. *> They have become different but they are all the original. * Then time must have passed and you must of put them in different environments. Either that or you haven't been performing proper maintenance on the duplicating machine and it is malfunctioning. > *> Of course the diary can be duplicated. That is the whole point* Then I’ll be damned if I know what “the whole point” is. > *> but it contains different strings of 0 and 1* Then the diary is saying different things from the original and you r duplicating machine is malfunctioning. And if a copy the diary is made with a Xerox machine and the copy says something different from the original then the Xerox machine is malfunctioning. > >> A thing like a unbridgeable wall between Washington and Moscow is > tantamount to postulating a new law of physics, > > > > > *That makes no sense, as your use of “tantamount” illustrates.* Get a dictionary, it means equivalent. > >> and there is no evidence such a law exists or any reason to even >> suspect that it does in order to explain experimental results. > > > > >* But it is enough we could build it.* You can’t build it because you can’t make the laws of physics be anything you want them to be. 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
