Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 14 Aug 2017, at 20:35, Brent Meeker wrote: 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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 14 Aug 2017, at 20:06, Brent Meeker wrote: 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

Re: R: Re: A profound lack of profundity

bject: R: Re: A profound lack of profundity First person, second person, and third person are basically grammatical categories: first person, I/we, second person, you/you, third person, him/them. The third independent person plays a central role in the interpretation of perceptual evidence in terms

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

> 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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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).

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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,

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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 >>

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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 communicate, and they agree that they both have

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 14 August 2017 at 14:15, Bruce Kellett wrote: The point, as I see it, is that if, after duplication, the copies can > communicate, and they agree that they both have psychological continuity > with the original person, and that, consequently, the original person saw

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 14/08/2017 12:44 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 11:30 am, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 14/08/2017 11:19 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:30 am, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 11:30 am, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 14/08/2017 11:19 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:30 am, Bruce Kellett < > bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> On 14/08/2017 2:51 am, Stathis

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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, Bruce

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 14/08/2017 11:19 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:30 am, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 14/08/2017 2:51 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:38 pm, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 10:30 am, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 14/08/2017 2:51 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:38 pm, Bruce Kellett < > bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> >> I think the problem I see is in the

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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 person

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 7:59 am, 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

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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 will I see?"​ ​. Do you think maybe just

Re: Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 5:38 am, 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

Re: R: Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13 Aug 2017, at 09:30, 'scerir' via Everything List wrote: First person, second person, and third person are basically grammatical categories: first person, I/we, second person, you/you, third person, him/them. The third independent person plays a central role in the interpretation

Fwd: Re: A profound lack of profundity

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 does not have 3p knowledge of the protocol, he

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you*

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13 Aug 2017, at 13:38, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 13/08/2017 6:00 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 13 August 2017 at 16:48, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 13/08/2017 10:01 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:19 am, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:38 pm, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 13/08/2017 6:00 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On 13 August 2017 at 16:48, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > >> On 13/08/2017 10:01 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> On Sun, 13 Aug 2017

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 1:56 am, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > ​ >>> ​>> ​ >>> Pronouns work fine today because nobody has yet made a "I" duplicating >>> machine, but when they do the English

Re: R: Re: A profound lack of profundity

I didn't read it either because it wanted access to all my contacts. But Shan Gao has a number of papers on arXiv.org. He has some peculiar ideas about QM. Brent On 8/13/2017 12:30 AM, 'scerir' via Everything List wrote: First person, second person, and third person are basically

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13 Aug 2017, at 00:58, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 12/08/2017 5:56 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Aug 2017, at 04:12, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you*

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​ >> ​>> ​ >> Pronouns work fine today because nobody has yet made a "I" duplicating >> machine, but when they do the English language is going to need a massive >> overhaul. >> > > ​> ​ > There are already billions

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13/08/2017 6:00 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 13 August 2017 at 16:48, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 13/08/2017 10:01 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:19 am, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13 August 2017 at 16:48, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 13/08/2017 10:01 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:19 am, Bruce Kellett < > bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> On 13/08/2017 9:05 am, Stathis Papaioannou

R: Re: A profound lack of profundity

First person, second person, and third person are basically grammatical categories: first person, I/we, second person, you/you, third person, him/them. The third independent person plays a central role in the interpretation of perceptual evidence in terms of reliable conceptual models of the

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13/08/2017 10:01 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:19 am, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 13/08/2017 9:05 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 13 August 2017 at 08:48, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13 August 2017 at 11:16, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > ​> ​ >> You call yourself "I" and I call myself "I", simultaneously, and we don't >> fight over who deserves the title, because that is how pronouns

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​ > You call yourself "I" and I call myself "I", simultaneously, and we don't > fight over who deserves the title, because that is how pronouns work. > ​Pronouns work fine today because nobody has yet made a "I" duplicating

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 9:19 am, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 13/08/2017 9:05 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On 13 August 2017 at 08:48, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > >> On 13/08/2017 12:04 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> On Sat, 12 Aug 2017

Re: A profound lack of profundity

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, Bruce Kellett wrote: > >> > >>> Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you* expect when > >>> pushing the button in Helsinki? >

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13/08/2017 9:05 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 13 August 2017 at 08:48, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 13/08/2017 12:04 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 at 4:52 pm, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13 August 2017 at 08:48, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 13/08/2017 12:04 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 at 4:52 pm, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > >> On 12/08/2017 1:42 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> >> First person

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12/08/2017 5:56 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Aug 2017, at 04:12, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you* expect when pushing the button in Helsinki? I

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 13/08/2017 12:04 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 at 4:52 pm, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 12/08/2017 1:42 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: First person experience is individual and private. The third

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 at 1:01 am, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > ​> ​ >> Before the duplication SP bet that "I will see W". >> > > ​And that's the problem right there. The above is about the "I"

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​ > Before the duplication SP bet that "I will see W". > ​And that's the problem right there. The above is about the "I" BEFORE the duplication but ​AFTER the duplication 2 people can make a equally strong case

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 at 4:52 pm, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 12/08/2017 1:42 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On 12 August 2017 at 13:13, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > >> On 12/08/2017 12:23 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> On 12 August 2017

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12 Aug 2017, at 04:12, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you* expect when pushing the button in Helsinki? I expect to die, to be 'cut', according to the

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12/08/2017 1:42 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 12 August 2017 at 13:13, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 12/08/2017 12:23 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 12 August 2017 at 12:12, Bruce Kellett

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12 August 2017 at 13:13, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 12/08/2017 12:23 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On 12 August 2017 at 12:12, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > >> On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40,

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12/08/2017 12:23 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 12 August 2017 at 12:12, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: Are you

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12 August 2017 at 12:12, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> >>> Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you* expect when pushing the button in Helsinki?

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12/08/2017 3:22 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: Are you telling us that P(W) ≠ P(M) ≠ 1/2. What do *you* expect when pushing the button in Helsinki? I expect to die, to be 'cut', according to the protocol. The guys in W and M are two new persons,

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 12 August 2017 at 11:16, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > ​>> ​ >>> Let me ask you >>> Stathis Papaioannou >>> ​a different question, do you think the following 2 questions are >>> equivalent?​ >>>

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​>> ​ >> Let me ask you >> Stathis Papaioannou >> ​a different question, do you think the following 2 questions are >> equivalent?​ >> 1) What will *I* >> ​see​ >> tomorrow? >> 2) What will Stathis Papaioannou see

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 at 3:35 am, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > ​> ​ >> "What will I see tomorrow?" is meaningful and does not contain any false >> propositions. > > > ​If all meaning is beaten out

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > ​> ​ > Not everyone will be successful in this scenario. ​It's not even clear to me that *anyone* would win the bet. Today you are about to be duplicated and you bet me $10 that tomorrow you, that is to say the

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​ > "What will I see tomorrow?" is meaningful and does not contain any false > propositions. ​If all meaning is beaten out of the personal pronoun "I"​ ​as Bruno does then it's not false and it's not a

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 11/08/2017 7:13 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 02:11, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 11/08/2017 9:45 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: "What will I see tomorrow?" is meaningful and does not contain any false propositions. Humans who

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 11/08/2017 7:13 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 Aug 2017, at 02:11, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 11/08/2017 9:45 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: "What will I see tomorrow?" is meaningful and does not contain any false propositions. Humans who are fully aware that there will be multiple copies

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 11 Aug 2017, at 02:11, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 11/08/2017 9:45 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: "What will I see tomorrow?" is meaningful and does not contain any false propositions. Humans who are fully aware that there will be multiple copies understand the question and can use it

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 11/08/2017 9:45 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: "What will I see tomorrow?" is meaningful and does not contain any false propositions. Humans who are fully aware that there will be multiple copies understand the question and can use it consistently, and as I have tried to demonstrate even

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 at 4:44 am, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > ​> ​ >>> I've asked the following question 4 times and you've refused to answer 4 >>> times but I'm going to ask for a fifth time

Re: A profound lack of profundity

Le 10 août 2017 20:49, "John Clark" a écrit : On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: ​> ​ > You (the one A*E trolling constantly on this list) ​Go to hell Quentin. Likewise, hope it'll happen soon, you deserve it. John K

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: ​> ​ > You (the one A*E trolling constantly on this list) ​Go to hell Quentin. John K Clark​ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​ >> I've asked the following question 4 times and you've refused to answer 4 >> times but I'm going to ask for a fifth time because it gets to the very >> heart of the topic: >> >> *Are the following 2 questions

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 10 Aug 2017, at 16:35, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​That does not compute. If ​BOTH answer are correct​ then the Helsinki man will see Moscow AND Washington not ​Moscow ​ OR​ Washington​. Come on Bruno, this isn't

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 at 12:35 am, John Clark wrote: > > I've asked the following question 4 times and you've refused to answer 4 > times but I'm going to ask for a fifth time because it gets to the very > heart of the topic: > > *Are the following 2 questions equivalent?* >

Re: A profound lack of profundity

2017-08-10 16:35 GMT+02:00 John Clark : > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > ​>> ​ >>> That does not compute. If ​BOTH answer are correct >>> ​ then the Helsinki man will see Moscow AND Washington not ​ >>> Moscow >>> ​OR​ >>>

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​ >> That does not compute. If ​BOTH answer are correct >> ​ then the Helsinki man will see Moscow AND Washington not ​ >> Moscow >> ​OR​ >> Washington >> ​. Come on Bruno, this isn't rocket science.​ >> > > > ​> ​ >

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 09 Aug 2017, at 04:15, John Clark wrote: ​> ​and so, only the prediction "W v M" was the correct one. ​That does not compute. If ​ BOTH answer are correct​ then the Helsinki man will see Moscow AND Washington not ​Moscow ​OR​ Washington​. Come on Bruno, this isn't rocket science.​

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​ > We obviously agree. The man in Moscow will not believe that "you will see > Moscow and noting else" would have been correct. He knows already that this > would be reftuted by the man in Washington, and, as a

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 07 Aug 2017, at 18:34, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​Nobody expect one answer , but everybody can see that BOTH agrees having one obtained one answer, ​Hmm ...does the Moscow man really believe the correct answer to

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​ > If there is no indeterminacy, what is the bet in Helsinki? > ​That is a excellent question! It's never been clear what the bet back in Helsinki was, but it's your thought experiment not mine so you tell me. ​ >> ​>>

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > ​> ​ > Nobody expect one answer , but everybody can see that BOTH agrees having > one obtained one answer, > ​Hmm ...does the Moscow man really believe the correct answer to the Helsinki man's question "What city will I

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 06 Aug 2017, at 22:41, John Clark wrote: ​> ​The rat thinks, "I will get a reward if I go through this door". The copies of the rat think, "great, I got the reward", or "no reward, I'm disappointed, ​Yes, the 2 copies saw different things when they opened their duplicating chamber

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 07 Aug 2017, at 00:25, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​you don't give any credit to what both copies say. I do give them credit, I give BOTH copies ​equal ​credit We are all OK with this. and that's why it's so silly

Re: A profound lack of profundity

I think you have conflated Bruno's post and mine. On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 at 6:41 am, John Clark wrote: > ​> ​ >> The rat thinks, "I will get a reward if I go through this door". The >> copies of the rat think, "great, I got the reward", or "no reward, I'm >> disappointed, >> >

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > ​> ​ > you don't give any credit to what both copies say. > I do give them credit, I give BOTH copies ​equal ​ credit and that's why it's so silly to expect one and only one correct answer to the question "What will I

Re: A profound lack of profundity

> > ​> ​ > The rat thinks, "I will get a reward if I go through this door". The > copies of the rat think, "great, I got the reward", or "no reward, I'm > disappointed, > ​ Yes, the 2 copies saw different things when they opened their duplicating chamber doors and so formed different memories

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 05 Aug 2017, at 18:30, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​That is why we have to make the question more precise, and replace "1)" by either 1') "What will 1-you end up seeing?" or by 1'') "What will 3-you end up seeing?".​

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 6 August 2017 at 11:52, John Clark wrote: If it depends on which copy is speaking, and it certainly does, then there > is NOT a definite answer or even a probabilistic answer to the question > "which event *will I* see after the duplication?" because in this context >

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​ > The prediction that not even the oracle could make is "which event will I > see after the duplication?". It is a valid question because I understand it, > ​ > ​Do you? Am I to understand you've had experience in this

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 at 3:23 am, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > >> ​ >>> ​>> ​ >>> Without the ​duplicating machine after it's all over you can say >>> "Yesterday I shouldn't have said there is a 30%

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > ​ >> ​>> ​ >> Without the ​duplicating machine after it's all over you can say >> "Yesterday I shouldn't have said there is a 30% chance event B will happen, >> yesterday I should have said there is a 100% chance

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​ > That is why we have to make the question more precise, and replace "1)" by > either 1') "What will 1-you end up seeing?" or by 1'') "What will 3-you end > up seeing?". > ​ > ​ > In that case, given that we assume

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 05 Aug 2017, at 16:04, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 at 4:26 am, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​You seem to agree that it's obvious the duplicating machine won't make a

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 04 Aug 2017, at 01:14, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Stathis Papaioannou ​>> ​I already know a rat will try to solve a maze to get food so I'll take that part of the bet, but I'm not sure what "​proportion of the number of attempts​" means or what the

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 at 4:26 am, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > ​> ​ >> You seem to agree that it's obvious the duplicating machine won't make a >> difference. > > > Sometimes it does and sometimes it

Re: A profound lack of profundity

On 04 Aug 2017, at 20:26, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: ​> ​You seem to agree that it's obvious the duplicating machine won't make a difference. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. ​With or without a ​

<    1   2   3   4   >