RE: Observer-Moment Measure from Universe Measure

2005-06-11 Thread Saibal Mitra
- Original Message - From: Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Saibal Mitra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 02:23 PM Subject: RE: Observer-Moment Measure from Universe Measure -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday,

RE: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
Hal Finney writes, in his usual eloquent and enlightening way: I was working on an essay on the nature of thought experiments about copying, but it got bogged down, so I will make this short. I am trying to analyze it based on evolutionary considerations. Copying is much like biological

RE: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread Hal Finney
Here's a little tongue-in-cheek rant... From an Unhappy Observer-Moment to its Future Observer-Moments Dear Observer-Moments of my future: Philosophical musing has forced me to reconsider my relationship to you, the observer moments which follow my own in the existence of the observer who ties

RE: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread rmiller
At 12:43 PM 6/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: Here's a little tongue-in-cheek rant... (snip) Yet how many philosophers are willing to seriously consider abandoning this arbitrary conditioning in deciding what is right and wrong? How many of us here are willing to take the logical path to its

Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread Russell Standish
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 08:15:25AM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote: OK, is that why you're saying the ASSA and RSSA are incompatible? But my point is that I think this incompatibility is removed if you always take the ASSA as applying to your current observer-moment, and the RSSA as applying to

Re: Questions on Russell's Why Occam paper

2005-06-11 Thread Russell Standish
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 01:59:16PM +0100, Patrick Leahy wrote: On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Russell Standish wrote: Yes, if you think there is a concrete reality in which everything exists (your question of where does the observer live?), then the AP is a tautology. What I meant by where does

Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread Jesse Mazer
Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 08:15:25AM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote: OK, is that why you're saying the ASSA and RSSA are incompatible? But my point is that I think this incompatibility is removed if you always take the ASSA as applying to your current observer-moment, and

Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread Hal Finney
Jesse Mazer writes: But I explained in my last post how the ASSA could also apply to an arbitrary next observer-moment as opposed to an arbitrary current one--if you impose the condition I mentioned about the relation between conditional probability and absolute probability, which is

Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

2005-06-11 Thread Jesse Mazer
Hal Finney wrote: Jesse Mazer writes: But I explained in my last post how the ASSA could also apply to an arbitrary next observer-moment as opposed to an arbitrary current one--if you impose the condition I mentioned about the relation between conditional probability and absolute