> On 12 Sep 2019, at 01:50, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:55 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > On 11 Sep 2019, at 01:30, Bruce Kellett <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> From: Bruno Marchal <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> On 8 Sep 2019, at 13:59, Bruce Kellett <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> If the only relevance you can find for many worlds is quantum immortality, >>>> then many worlds is indeed dead. Quantum immortality has been shown many >>>> times to be a complete nonsense. >>> >>> Really. I did not known that. Could you give the references. >> Follow the Wikipedia entry on quantum suicide. >> > That is not what I mean by a reference. > > I later gave a reference to the paper by Mallah -- whom you know of, > apparently. The paper is available at > > https://arxiv.org/abs/0902.0187 <https://arxiv.org/abs/0902.0187> > >
Yes, the oldest participant in this list have know Jacques Mallah, who participated a lot in this list. Mallah is wrong here: << Max Tegmark publicized the QS idea, but in some ways he is more of a moderate on the issue than most of its believers are. If he were to follow in the footsteps of Don Page and alter his views, recanting belief in QS, it would be a great help in exposing the belief as a fallacy, and I hold out hope that it is possible that he will do so. In his paper [Tegmark 1] QS is explained as follows: “Since there is exactly one observer having perceptions both before and after the trigger event, and since it occurred too fast to notice, the MWI prediction is that” (the experimenter) “will hear “click” with 100% certainty.” That is a rather odd statement because he is certainly aware that in the MWI there is no sense in which it can be rightfully said that “there is exactly one observer” either before or after the experiment. The ket notation may be unhelpful here; indeed, if the tensor product of kets on the left hand side were expanded instead of factoring out the observer, there would appear to have been “two observers” initially. >> Two different brains doing the same computation gives only one subjective first person. Bruno > > [.....] > > >> None of this has anything to do with wave-packet reduction, so you can rest >> easy. >> > > You lost me here. With the wave reduction, there is just no quantum > immortality at all, nor even quantum suicide. I guess I mess something. > > The argument was that QI makes no sense, even in a many-worlds setting. > > The only “reasonable” critics was the one done by Jacques Mallah on this > list, which claims that if QI or MI is correct, we should expect to be very > old. But Quentin answered this validly: we expect in all situation to be just > a bit older than where we remember coming from, and the paradox comes from a > confusing between relative and absolute self-sampling on the states or > histories. > > The trouble with this is that neither ASSA and RSSA is a law of nature. As I > have said, from the 1p perspective, I live more years between 100 and 1000 > than between 1 and 100. So I expect to be very old. What we remember is > actually irrelevant -- we can always check our birth certificate if we forget > how old we are. In other words, we can use external sources to refresh > memories. What we personally remember at any instant is variable and > unreliable. Check against external references..... > > Typically, also, old and young are not absolute concept. > > No, they are concepts relative to actual life span -- you are always at your > youngest when you are born, and at your oldest just before you die. > > With mechanism or quantum mechanics without collapse, we can say that we are > always young. > > Another good reason for abandoning mechanism. > > Bruce > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTM7c97pmzXq5Fb%3D1nq%2BbdxfkqojZn%3DMXsuvhC%2BmLfy8A%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTM7c97pmzXq5Fb%3D1nq%2BbdxfkqojZn%3DMXsuvhC%2BmLfy8A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/674E7588-3DA3-4690-9652-63ECCE063476%40ulb.ac.be.
