On 8/14/2017 10:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
If after a rat has been duplicated the 2 rats then have different
experiences, such as one getting a electric shock and one not getting
one, then they will no longer be identical and will behave
differently in the future. I see no indeterminacy or
> On 8/14/2017 10:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> If after a rat has been duplicated the 2 rats then have different
> experiences, such as one getting a electric shock and one not getting one,
> then they will no longer be identical and will behave differently in the
> future. I see no
On 8/14/2017 10:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 14 Aug 2017, at 18:25, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 8/14/2017 1:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Aug 2017, at 21:25, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 8/13/2017 10:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Aug 2017, at 19:06, Brent Meeker wrote:
On
On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 at 2:52 am, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>
> On 8/14/2017 6:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:31 pm, Bruce Kellett
> wrote:
>
>> On 14/08/2017 4:20 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Aug
I red Gao's books a few years back. He was teaching at the University of Sidney
if I recall correctly. I liked his stuff but didn't seem useful to my focused
interests. Changing subjects, how about this for a BS thought? One
consciousness, yourself, of with everyone else, spanning other Everett
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:40 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> I let you know that some people understand the result without ever doing
> this thought
I have no doubt. Some people on this list understand things without giving
the matter any thought at all, in the same what
On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 at 9:09 am, John Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> >
>> By their behaviour, rats show an operational understanding of
>> probability.
>
>
> That because a rat can remember the past and a rat can
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> By their behaviour, rats show an operational understanding of probability.
That because a rat can remember the past and a rat can use induction to
make a prediction, and most important of all a rat knows if it's
Forwarded Message
Whoa. Anyone have opinions on this?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.03486.pdf
"A Solution of the P versus NP Problem"
Norbert Blum
Institut f¨ur Informatik, Universit¨at Bonn
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 144, D-53113 Bonn, Germany
email: b...@cs.uni-bonn.de
August
On 14 Aug 2017, at 02:30, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 14/08/2017 2:51 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:38 pm, Bruce Kellett wrote:
I think the problem I see is in the insistence that one restrict
the subjects of the duplication to first
On 13 Aug 2017, at 21:38, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 8/12/2017 3:58 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
You try to help John C., but you contradict his "theory" (which is
indeed based on the 1p/3p confusion).
I suggest that the whole of step 3 is based on a 1p/3p confusion.
If the duplicated subject
On 13 Aug 2017, at 23:59, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 PM, Stathis Papaioannou
wrote:
> After duplication, the copies will not claim to be the same
person any more,
True but both will claim they are the "I' who yesterday asked the
question "What city
On 14 Aug 2017, at 04:03, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 14/08/2017 3:25 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Aug 2017, at 01:46, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sat 12. Aug 2017 at 03:12, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40,
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 3:08 pm, Bruce Kellett
wrote:
> On 14/08/2017 2:32 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> On 14 August 2017 at 14:15, Bruce Kellett
> wrote:
>
> The point, as I see it, is that if, after duplication, the copies can
>>
On 14/08/2017 4:20 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 3:08 pm, Bruce Kellett
> wrote:
On 14/08/2017 2:32 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 14 August 2017 at 14:15, Bruce Kellett
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:31 pm, Bruce Kellett
wrote:
> On 14/08/2017 4:20 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 3:08 pm, Bruce Kellett <
> bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 14/08/2017 2:32 pm, Stathis Papaioannou
On 8/14/2017 1:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Aug 2017, at 21:38, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 8/12/2017 3:58 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
You try to help John C., but you contradict his "theory" (which is
indeed based on the 1p/3p confusion).
I suggest that the whole of step 3 is based on a
On 8/14/2017 6:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:31 pm, Bruce Kellett
> wrote:
On 14/08/2017 4:20 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 3:08 pm, Bruce Kellett
On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Stathis Papaioannou
wrote:
>
> That both refer to themselves as "I" and claim have entered the duplicator
> in Helsinki yesterday and asked "What city will I see?" is not
> grammatically confusing at all.
>
The question was asked
On 14 Aug 2017, at 18:35, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 8/14/2017 1:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Aug 2017, at 21:38, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 8/12/2017 3:58 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
You try to help John C., but you contradict his "theory" (which
is indeed based on the 1p/3p confusion).
On 14 Aug 2017, at 18:08, John Clark wrote:
As I've said many times, it's always possible to trace a unique
memory pathway from the present back into the past, even a rat can
do it, but doing the same thing from the present into the future is
impossible because we can remember the past
21 matches
Mail list logo