referring to > t0 | > | > t1 T / \ H > / \ > t2 / / \ > | | \ > t3 Y R B
Assume that all three branches occur (two copying events). Gilles Henri wrote: >With the color cards, each Jane will measure subjectively a probability 1/2 >of yellow, 1/4 of red (1/2 H *1/2 "being chosen as Jane 1") and 1/4 blue, >so again p(H) = p(T)=1/2 with the conditional probability formula. >The probability 2/3 is indeed the chance of finding someone who saw H after >the first experiment from a bird perspective, because duplicating >introduces a bias. I agree that according to the approach taken by the q-su's, namely that one's measure is somehow distributed among the so called computational continuations of one's brain activity, the probabilities would be (1/2,1/4,1/4). It is a history dependent claim: > t0 | > | > t1 W / \ H > / \ > t2 T/ \H \ > | \ \ > t3 Y R B where W=wait to show the coin to her until the second copying event. Since she doesn't know when copying occurs this looks identical from her perspective, but the measure distribution is (1/4,1/4,1/2) according to the QS claim. Presumably this measure distribution would remain the same years later. I think this is already both ill-defined and anti-intuitive. To extend the example suppose that to counter the unfortunate demographic imbalance in China, someone figures out how to instantly make a million copies of Gong Li. According to the flow of measure claim, each of these copies would have just one millionth of a normal human measure. So these women would practically be zombies. It would not be justified to give them equal rights since they have so much less consciousness. This would remain true even as life experiences give them different perspectives and evolved personalities, some of them come to America, etc. I think this shows how ridiculous the claim is. - - - - - - - Jacques Mallah ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Graduate Student / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate "I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum My URL: http://pages.nyu.edu/~jqm1584/