> On 2 Aug 2018, at 20:13, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 8/2/2018 1:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> Not necessarily. The WM-duplication, like Everett QM, illustrates that >> sometimes two events can be realised from a third person pod, yet only one >> event is realised from the observer’s pov, and that brings back a notion of >> first person indeterminacy, and notions of local probabilities, >> credibilities, plausibilities, etc. > > But now you've invoked an ensemble of observers to go with the ensemble of > events and you've done nothing to solve the problem. And don't tell me the > observers will be "weighted". That doesn't mean anything either. The whole > point of physicists wanting an ensemble was so that they could explain > probabilities by counting cases. "Weights" just obfuscate the problem. If > we want to use weights we can assign a weight of 1.0 to the thing observed > and weight 0 to the rest.
By weight I meant the counting, well, the masure on some continuum, provided by the unique measure, provided by Gleason theorem, or its hopeful equivalent in arithmetic. Bruno > > Brent > > -- > 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. -- 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.
