On 06 Nov 2008, at 02:37, Thomas Laursen wrote:
Hi everyone, I am a complete layman but still got the illusion that
maybe one day I would be able to understand the probability part of MW
if explained in a simple way. I know it's the most controversal part
of MW and that there are several
Hello Bruno,
More exactly: I can conceive fake policemen in paper are not conscious,
and that is all I need to accept I can be fail by some zombie.
Thus I can conceive zombies.
Ok, but conceivability does not entail possibilty. I think philosophical
zombies are impossible (=not able to
Isn't a zombie equivalent to, say, a spreadsheet that doesn't really perform
the proper calculations, but produces all the right answers for all the data
and functions you happen to put in?
It seems like such an elaborate con-job is far more inefficient and
intensive (and pointlessly so) once you
At 10:54 AM 11/6/2008, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Nov 2008, at 02:37, Thomas Laursen wrote:
Hi everyone, I am a complete layman but still got the illusion that
maybe one day I would be able to understand the probability part of MW
if explained in a simple way. I know it's the most
Many thanks for your answers, Anna and Bruno. Although I don't grap
much since I'm not familiar with maths or physics on a higher level.
Like rmiller suggests: consider me as an bright child (age 41 :-) But
maybe probability in MW is not really explainabel in everyday
language? First of all, I
language? In the latter probably just means likely to happen but
if EVERYTHING happens then how can the concept make sense? I guess it
must be two different concepts, then?
No, not necessarily.
There are two ways that probability can play a real role in MW.
This is no different from how it
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:52 AM, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jason,
Le 04-nov.-08, à 23:21, Jason Resch a écrit :
although I agree with Brent, if the simulated world in the computer is
entirely cut off from causal effects of the physical world where the
computer is
Hi
I haven't contributed to the list recently but probability is a topic
that interests me and which I discussed several years ago. I have a
relativist interpretation of the MW.
To apply Probabilities to the MW _every probability should be stated as
a conditional probability, that is
On Nov 5, 2008, at 3:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Just consider the computation which correspond to your actual real
life. That computation is encoded (indeed an infinity of times) in the
Universal Deploiement, which is itself encoded (indeed an infinity of
times) in the set of all
9 matches
Mail list logo
