On 02 Mar 2014, at 01:56, LizR wrote:
I like the frog and bird metaphors, though! At least I prefer the
idea of the bird looking down on the mathematical landscape than
worrying about the eye of god.
I prefer the inner god to be a bird than a frog, but may be that's
personal :
The
I like the frog and bird metaphors, though! At least I prefer the idea of
the bird looking down on the mathematical landscape than worrying about
the eye of god.
In the beginning was the Bird, to quote The Unpleasant Profession of
Jonathan Hoag.
--
You received this message because you are
On 26 Oct 2013, at 19:09, Jason Resch wrote:
John,
I came across this today, which you might find of interest:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf
In particular section 3 goes to great pains to describe the
importance of the first person / third person distinction. From the
On 03 Nov 2013, at 19:46, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
So you sees both Moscow AND Washington.
No, anyone of the two see only one city.
So what is the one and only one city that the 2 you see.
W for tham in W. And M
On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:51, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 09:17, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 02 Nov 2013, at 20:11, Jason Resch wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:43, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/3/2013 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Nov 2013, at 21:47, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/2/2013 10:53 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
You have been duplicated so there are TWO
On Nov 4, 2013, at 2:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:51, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 09:17, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Bruno Marchal
On 04 Nov 2013, at 15:57, Jason Resch wrote:
On Nov 4, 2013, at 2:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:51, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 09:17, Jason Resch wrote:
On
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 04 Nov 2013, at 15:57, Jason Resch wrote:
On Nov 4, 2013, at 2:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 18:51, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Bruno Marchal
On 04 Nov 2013, at 18:53, Jason Resch wrote:
It looks like Zeh had more to say in 1999, this theory seems much
closer to many dreams: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-minds_interpretation
#Continuous_infinity_of_minds and http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908084
Continuous infinity
On 02 Nov 2013, at 18:53, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
wrote:
You have been duplicated so there are TWO FIRST PERSON POV and
they both remember writing the diary, so which one is Bruno Marchal
talking about?
Anyone of the two
On 02 Nov 2013, at 20:11, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 19:30, Jason Resch wrote:
Normally this is explained in Albert's book, which I think you have.
Are you referring to Quantum Mechanics and
On 02 Nov 2013, at 21:47, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/2/2013 10:53 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
You have been duplicated so there are TWO FIRST PERSON POV and
they both remember writing the diary, so which one is Bruno Marchal
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 02 Nov 2013, at 20:11, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 19:30, Jason Resch wrote:
Normally this is explained in Albert's book,
On 03 Nov 2013, at 09:17, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 02 Nov 2013, at 20:11, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 19:30, Jason Resch wrote:
John,
You seemed convinced that observers within duplicated but divergent
simulations cannot distinguish their observations from a single course that
evolves randomly. Why not proceed to the next step?
Jason
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:22 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 03 Nov 2013, at 09:17, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 02 Nov 2013, at 20:11, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Bruno Marchal
Hi John,
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 4:13 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
John, you are the guy who explained Bell's inequality in a very
compelling way. You're obviously smart
I’m blushing.
so why are you only
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
So you sees both Moscow AND Washington.
No, anyone of the two see only one city.
So what is the one and only one city that the 2 you see.
you are both of them,
Yes,
but both see only one city.
Yes, and if
On 11/3/2013 1:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Nov 2013, at 21:47, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/2/2013 10:53 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
mailto:allco...@gmail.com wrote:
You have been duplicated so there are TWO FIRST PERSON
On 03 Nov 2013, at 16:22, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
The prediction, asked in Helsinki, concerned the 1-views,
And John Clark asks the prediction concerns the first person view
of who? and Bruno answers the first person view
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 01 Nov 2013, at 15:17, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
When some bully oversteps the line of decency, then by default any
discussion ceases to be rational. Then we are left with the choice to let it
be or denounce the
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Since more than one or two years, John Clark oscillates between obvious
non sense to obvious, period. We might hope than in his obvious,
period phase, he might go to the next step,
John Clark doesn't do that because John
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Since more than one or two years, John Clark oscillates between obvious
non sense to obvious, period. We might hope than in his obvious,
period
Hi,
I comment on Quentin, and then on John, to help anyone interested.
On 01 Nov 2013, at 22:22, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/1 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote
The diary is useless because the diary was written
On 02 Nov 2013, at 11:13, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 01 Nov 2013, at 15:17, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
When some bully oversteps the line of decency, then by default any
discussion ceases to be rational. Then we are
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
You have been duplicated so there are TWO FIRST PERSON POV and they both
remember writing the diary, so which one is Bruno Marchal talking about?
Anyone of the two
So you sees both Moscow AND Washington.
each will
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Oct 2013, at 19:30, Jason Resch wrote:
Normally this is explained in Albert's book, which I think you have.
Are you referring to Quantum Mechanics and Experience (1992)? I do not
have this book but will add
On 11/2/2013 10:53 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
mailto:allco...@gmail.com wrote:
You have been duplicated so there are TWO FIRST PERSON POV and they
both
remember writing the diary, so which one is Bruno Marchal
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 6:54 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
this distracts from the question asked, which concerns the first person
pov, from the first person pov. That is the first person experience. [...]
On 31 Oct 2013, at 18:54, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
this distracts from the question asked, which concerns the first
person pov, from the first person pov. That is the first person
experience. [...] Comp accepts that
On 31 Oct 2013, at 20:49, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
As I said before there is a profound difference between the two.
After Everett's thought experiment is over only ONE person is seen
by a third party so it's easy to
On 01 Nov 2013, at 02:51, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
A) The test described where the simulation process forks 8 times
and 256 copies are created and they each see a different pattern of
the ball changing color
On 01 Nov 2013, at 07:04, LizR wrote:
So, has step 3 gone from that's absurd to everyone knows that ?!
Since more than one or two years, John Clark oscillates between
obvious non sense to obvious, period.
We might hope than in his obvious, period phase, he might go to the
next step,
Le 1 nov. 2013 00:39, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com a écrit :
John, you are not the first that Quentin has categorized as a roger or
stephen lin. Richard
What does suggest that the universe is finite in the fact that we've found
a fully formed galaxy 700 millions years after the big bang?
Intuition
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 1 nov. 2013 00:39, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com a écrit :
John, you are not the first that Quentin has categorized as a roger or
stephen lin. Richard
What does suggest that the universe is
OK... but then you shouldn't have use that as an argument... I respect
intuition, I don't respect using that as an argument.
Quentin
2013/11/1 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
Intuition
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
Le 1 nov. 2013 00:39,
2013/11/1 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
OK. I should have said suggests intuitively: or intuitively suggests
rather than merely suggests that the universe is finite. However, your
insult of categorizing me with roger and stephen lin is unmerited.
Yes.
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:01 AM,
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
OK. I should have said suggests intuitively: or intuitively suggests
rather than merely suggests that the universe is finite. However, your
insult of categorizing me with roger and stephen lin is unmerited.
And now you
2013/11/1 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
wrote:
OK. I should have said suggests intuitively: or intuitively suggests
rather than merely suggests that the universe is finite. However, your
insult of categorizing me
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/11/1 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
wrote:
OK. I should have said suggests intuitively: or intuitively suggests
rather than merely
Telmo, Do you think Quentin should be banned for bullying?
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.comwrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
wrote:
2013/11/1 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at
2013/11/1 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
Telmo, Do you think Quentin should be banned for bullying?
I did not bully you, I asked several times the same question, firstly
gently, and you mocked me, secondly, you mocked the proves/suggest, then
you said fuck you (I said for fuck sake before,
When some bully oversteps the line of decency, then by default any
discussion ceases to be rational. Then we are left with the choice to let
it be or denounce the crossing of our personalized line.
With regards to this infinite back and forth, all the insults and
cul-de-sac arguments, with zero
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Telmo, Do you think Quentin should be banned for bullying?
I don't think that anyone should be banned. We are all grown ups and
it's not that hard to set up an email filter.
I do think that it's depressing when people start
On 01 Nov 2013, at 08:06, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 6:54 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
this distracts from the question asked, which concerns the first
person
pov, from the first
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:04 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So, has step 3 gone from that's absurd to everyone knows that ?!
Yes that is the situation right now, but with backpedaling and additional
caveats and restrictions made by Bruno and other members of this list that
I expect to hear
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:40 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:04 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So, has step 3 gone from that's absurd to everyone knows that ?!
Yes that is the situation right now, but with backpedaling and additional
caveats and
2013/11/1 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:04 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So, has step 3 gone from that's absurd to everyone knows that ?!
Yes that is the situation right now, but with backpedaling and additional
caveats and restrictions made by Bruno and
On 01 Nov 2013, at 15:17, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
When some bully oversteps the line of decency, then by default any
discussion ceases to be rational. Then we are left with the choice
to let it be or denounce the crossing of our personalized line.
With regards to this infinite back
Liz,
On 01 Nov 2013, at 17:40, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:04 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So, has step 3 gone from that's absurd to everyone knows that ?!
Yes that is the situation right now, but with backpedaling and
additional caveats and restrictions made by Bruno
I am definitely slow compared to most of the members of this list.
Although I have a 1966 PhD in physics from Harvard,
my major was in electromagnetic theory,
and after graduation, studied radar scattering and laser propagation,
which are 19th century subjects even though the technology is 20th
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote
The diary is useless because the diary was written by you and contains
predictions about the further adventures of you, but now there are 2 (or
more) people with the title you ...
..., but now there are 2 (or more)
2013/11/1 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote
The diary is useless because the diary was written by you and
contains predictions about the further adventures of you, but now there
are 2 (or more) people with the title you
On 2 November 2013 15:57, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
By the way, personally, I thank you for – at substantial personal cost --
blowing the whistle on this 1980s MIC gravy train. A world without
whistleblowers is – IMO the kind of place Torquemada would feel right at
home
On 30 Oct 2013, at 18:21, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/10/30 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno asked me Do you think that you die in a self-duplication
experience? and I said that depends on what the
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this entire matter could be clarified if you could reformulate
the following question in such a way that a simple yes or no answer can be
given:
Do you die if two exact copies of Quentin Anciaux in
2013/10/31 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
I think this entire matter could be clarified if you could reformulate
the following question in such a way that a simple yes or no answer can be
given:
Do you die if
On 10/31/2013 10:18 AM, John Clark wrote:
what is asked is the probability to see moscow, likewise when you measure
the spin
of the electron, the question is the probability you measure spin up
As I said before there is a profound difference between the two. After Everett's thought
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
this distracts from the question asked, which concerns the first person
pov, from the first person pov. That is the first person experience. [...]
Comp accepts that both copies are equivalent (with respect to identity)
John,
I reformulated the UDA in a way that does not use any pronouns at all, and
it doesn't matter if you consider the question from one view or from all
the views, the conclusion is the same. Perhaps you wouldn't mind
commenting on whether or not you agree with my conclusion. I will re-post
it
2013/10/31 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
this distracts from the question asked, which concerns the first person
pov, from the first person pov. That is the first person experience. [...]
Comp accepts that both
2013/10/31 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
As I said before there is a profound difference between the two. After
Everett's thought experiment is over only ONE person is seen by a third
party so it's easy to determine
John, you are not the first that Quentin has categorized as a roger or
stephen lin. Richard
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/10/31 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
As
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
A) The test described where the simulation process forks 8 times and 256
copies are created and they each see a different pattern of the ball
changing color
Duplicating a brain is not enough, the intelligence has NOT
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
if 've waited too much to put you in the boitakon, meet roger and
stephen li
I'm guessing that's an insult of some sort but my Quentinspeak is a little
rusty so I'm not sure.
John K Clark
--
You received this
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:51 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
A) The test described where the simulation process forks 8 times and 256
copies are created and they each see a different pattern of the ball
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno asked me Do you think that you die in a self-duplication
experience? and I said that depends on what the meaning of you is. Bruno
responded with We have already agree that you concerns the guy(s) who
will
2013/10/30 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
Bruno asked me Do you think that you die in a self-duplication
experience? and I said that depends on what the meaning of you is. Bruno
responded with We have already agree
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
If John Clark was lying and Bruno has not changed his mind and you is
still the guy(s) who will remember having been in Helsinki then it is
beyond dispute that YOU will see BOTH Moscow AND Helsinki.
It is correct
2013/10/29 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
If John Clark was lying and Bruno has not changed his mind and you
is still the guy(s) who will remember having been in Helsinki then it is
beyond dispute that YOU will
2013/10/29 Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
2013/10/29 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
If John Clark was lying and Bruno has not changed his mind and you
is still the guy(s) who will remember having been in
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I give the two definition of the pronouns used in the reasoning, and
often confused by the use of an identical term in natural language, but
clearly distinguishes in UDA step 2, and the next one. The 1-you, basically
your
2013/10/28 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I give the two definition of the pronouns used in the reasoning, and
often confused by the use of an identical term in natural language, but
clearly distinguishes in UDA step
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
I give the two definition of the pronouns used in the reasoning, and
often confused by the use of an identical term in natural language, but
clearly distinguishes in UDA step 2, and the next one. The 1-you, basically
will be problematic. but again my modal logic is very rusty so I won't
argue the point ...
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 02:18:48 -0500
Subject: Re: For John Clark
From: jasonre...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 9:04 PM, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi
On 26 Oct 2013, at 23:53, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/26/2013 1:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
You betray your feeling here. Some people, like you apparently,
indeed find the FPI and the reversal as a work of genius. They
think: if you were right you should have the Nobel Prize, but you
don't, so
On 27 Oct 2013, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/26/2013 1:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Oct 2013, at 23:33, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote:
...
It is:
3) Bruno has yet to develop the mathematical tools to do practical
computations.
Not at all. That would be the case if the goal was doing
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
I came across this today, which you might find of interest:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf In particular section 3 goes
to great pains to describe the importance of the first person / third
person
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
So, you still find nothing to say about many-worlds interpretation of QM
where you are duplicated billions of time a picosecond, but you are able to
babble for years about a simple duplication experiment ?
The
You're just lying... You are the one treating things inconsistently, it's a
shame your pride so high you can't even recognize it.
Believe what you want to believe.
Quentin
2013/10/27 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
probability implies prediction and prediction has nothing to do with a
sense of self, and that is what Bruno's proof is all about.
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not what? Absolutely not that probability implies
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
You're just lying... You are the one treating things inconsistently, it's
a shame your pride so high you can't even recognize it. Believe what you
want to believe.
The following is a flow diagram of the conversation
The following is a flow diagram of the conversation we've been having on
this thread:
1) Point John Clarck mistakes.
2) John Clark ignores it. Repeat the same mistake ad nauseam.
3) goto 1
Quentin
2013/10/27 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux
2013/10/27 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
I came across this today, which you might find of interest:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf In particular section 3 goes
to great pains to describe the
On 27 Oct 2013, at 15:54, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
I came across this today, which you might find of interest: http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf
In particular section 3 goes to great pains to describe the
On 27 Oct 2013, at 16:47, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
probability implies prediction and prediction has nothing to do
with a sense of self, and that is what Bruno's proof is all about.
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not
On 27 Oct 2013, at 17:27, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/10/27 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
I came across this today, which you might find of interest: http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf
In particular
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 7:47 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
Unlike you, I fortunately do not have the time to dig up your ad
hominems.
Well, I sure didn't have to dig very far to find
John,
Do you have any comment on the article I posted?
Jason
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:52 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
You're just lying... You are the one treating things inconsistently,
it's a
On 10/27/2013 1:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Here's a blog post that might suggest a point of contact:
http://blog.sigfpe.com/2013/10/distributed-computing-with-alien.html
Don't hesitate to elaborate, but this assumes QM, and does not bear on the mind-body or
1p/3p relation.
No it
John,
Sorry, I missed your reply. Some comment's in-line below:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 9:54 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
I came across this today, which you might find of interest:
On 25 Oct 2013, at 17:30, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
Do you think that [you] die in a self-duplication experience?
^^^
We've been through this, it depends on who the hell you is. Is
you
On 25 Oct 2013, at 18:08, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Be consistent, reject MWI, or ask *the same question* about the
probability of *you* (who is you ? pinocchio maybe ?)
In the MWI John Clark doesn't have to worry about
On 25 Oct 2013, at 18:24, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
We have already agree that you concerns the guy(s) who will
remember having been in Helsinki.
Fine, then obviously You will survive and equally obvious you
will
On 25 Oct 2013, at 22:28, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/25/2013 9:08 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Be consistent, reject MWI, or ask *the same question* about the
probability of *you* (who is you ? pinocchio maybe ?)
In the
On 25 Oct 2013, at 23:33, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote:
Citeren meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 10/25/2013 9:08 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Quentin Anciaux
allco...@gmail.com mailto:allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Be consistent, reject MWI, or ask *the same question*
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, you could always reciprocate Quentin's courtesy and [...]
Courtesy? This is the fellow who said:
Your agenda is not to try to comprehend something, it is just to bash
someone with no reason except
John,
I came across this today, which you might find of interest:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf
In particular section 3 goes to great pains to describe the importance of
the first person / third person distinction. From the paper:
A. “It doesn’t explain why we perceive
Brent,
Section 3b of ( http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032v1.pdf ) seems to also
answer some of the questions you posed recently regarding superposition in
MWI:
B. “It doesn’t explain why we don’t perceive weird
superpositions”
That’s right! The Everett postulate doesn’t! Since the
state
1 - 100 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
