On 9/17/2019 10:01 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 05:18:51PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
wrote:
On 9/10/2019 4:30 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Another argument that has been given here before is that if quantum
immortality is true, then we should expect to see a number of people who
are considerably older than the normal life expectancy -- and we do not
see people who are two or three hundred years old. Even if the
probabilities are very low, there have been an awful lot of people born
within the last 500 or so years -- some must have survived on our branch
if this scenario is true.
My argument was that each of us should find ourselves to be much older than
even the oldest people we know.
Only if the ASSA is true, not the RSSA. But even if the ASSA is true,
the total measure of very old observer moments may well be
insignificant compared with those of moderate age, so no, your
argument fails. The latter was my mistake in an argument I had with
Jacques Mallah once.
I don't understand what you mean by ASSA vs RSSA. Can you expand?
Whether your measure at ages below 100 outweighs the measure above 120
would depend on what the branching is like. That's why I was trying to
pin down what the theory of branching is? If every instant of your life
has a successor, then every branch has a path to infinity. But if almost
all branches reach death then only one or a few reach 200. Bruno has in
mind that your measure is made of "conscious moments" and "you" are just
some set of them or all of them.
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/00e0671d-7133-adfc-d503-69c33551c1b2%40verizon.net.
