On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 8:43 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
>> that very silly theory can not say who that shadowy mysterious person >> called Mr.You is, > > > *> The mechanist hypothesis assures that both copy have the right to be > qualified as you.* > So yesterday before the duplication when there was only one it would be idiotic to ask which one of the one will see Moscow! > >> nor can it say what the correct answer to a obvious question turned >> out to be, "what one and only one city did Mr.You end up seeing??” > > > > *> Indeed. That is the point. That is the first person indeterminacy,* > I agree that is the point, and that's exactly why first person indeterminacy is complete gibberish, as rational a concept as asking " How many blitzphits will a klogknee have tomorrow?" *> that you are using each time you defend Everett.* > Yes, with Everett if you ask me which version of me will be the man that sees the coin come up heads when the coin is tossed tomorrow I will say it will be the version of me that sees heads. And yes the answer is banal, but then it was a banal question. >> It can't say what the correct answer was *EVEN AFTER* the "experiment" >> is long over. > > > > *> That is where you forget to put yourself in the shoes of the guy making > the experience. * > It's physically impossible to put myself in the shoes of the guys having the experiences because 4 feet are involved and I only have 2, there are 2 guys having *A* first person experience. *> After the experiment, it is easy to understand that both know very well > the answer, * > Forget the answer, both before and after the "experiment" nobody even knew what the hell the question was! >> So the outcome of the "experiment" has produced precisely ZERO bits of >> new information because everybody already know the man who saw Moscow would >> become the Moscow Man and the man who say Washington would become the >> Washington Man. > > > > *But that is tautological.* > *DUH,* *I KNOW!* But it's your scenario not mine, something that is not an experiment and something that contains very little thought. *> After the experience, each copy get one bit of information.* > Before the experience everybody and everything already knew that the man who saw Moscow would be the Moscow Man and the man who saw Washington would become the Washington Man, so after the experience everybody received precisely ZERO bits of new information. *> Your use of matter is similar to the pseudo-explanation “God did it”.* And that is my cue to say goodnight because i know from experience you never say anything of interest after you invoke that word. 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1AC%3DbhT9k2w1NjbJvE0MAvQ%2BGEQebRFX21itDucO0bkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
