Le 05-juin-05, à 05:53, Hal Finney a écrit :
Lee Corbin writes:
But in general, what do observer-moments explain? Or what does the
hypothesis concerning them explain? I just don't get a good feel
that there are any higher level phenomena which might be reduced
to observer-moments (I am still
Le 03-juin-05, à 06:20, Lee Corbin a écrit :
[Stephen:] What if I, or any one else's 1st person aspect, can not
be copied?
If the operation of copying is impossible, what is the status of all
of these thought experiments?
I notice that many people seek refuge in the no-copying theorem of
Le 05-juin-05, à 01:04, Lee Corbin a écrit :
This is the central problem from those who are deeply concerned as
to *why* 1st person experiences exist. Too bad that to me, it's
just obvious that they must. I literally cannot conceive of how
it could be different! (Poor me, I suppose---in
- Original Message -
From: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 08:10 PM
Subject: Observer-Moment Measure from Universe Measure
To apply Wei's method, first we need to get serious about what is an OM.
We need a formal model and
Dear Hal and Bruno,
- Original Message -
From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 3:02 AM
Subject: Re: Observer-Moment Measure from Universe Measure
Le 05-juin-05, à 05:53, Hal Finney a écrit
Hal Finney writes
Lee Corbin writes:
But in general, what do observer-moments explain? Or what does the
hypothesis concerning them explain? I just don't get a good feel
that there are any higher level phenomena which might be reduced
to observer-moments (I am still very skeptical that
Bruno writes
All right. So you both (Hal Finney and Lee Corbin) with the first axiom
Arghh! My new revelation says that axioms are fine if
you are doing math. But some of us are doing something
here that is entirely separate: philosophy. I love math;
it is my hobby. But axioms and all that
All,
Another hypothetical. In 1939, let's say, a writer comes up with a sci-fi
story, which is published the next year. It involves (let's say) a uranium
bomb and a beryllium target in the Arizona desert that might blow up and
cause problems for everyone. His main character is a fellow he
All,
Another hypothetical. In 1939, let's say, a writer comes up with a sci-fi
story, which is published the next year. It involves (let's say) a uranium
bomb and a beryllium target in the Arizona desert that might blow up and
cause problems for everyone. His main character is a fellow he
At 12:31 PM 6/5/2005, rmiller wrote:
A correction---the first nuclear test, was named, of course, Trinity, not
The Manhattan Project. And the core of the device, which Oppenheimer
called the gadget was about the size of a grapefruit.
RM
Bruno provides the exercise
I notice that many people seek refuge in the no-copying theorem of
QM.
Exercise: 1) Show by a qualitative informal reasoning that if we are
Turing emulable then a no-cloning theorem is a necessity.
My best guess right now? Your challenge would be a futile
Stathis writes
I believe that tomorrow I will become one of the people in the multiverse
who believe they are me and share my memories.
What if you have just taken Midazolam, and so won't remember
any of this tomorrow? (I contend that you'll be them anyway.)
When I think about this, I
OOPS! I meant to post it to the list. I'll now just post this.
Brent
-Original Message-
From: Lee Corbin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 4:52 PM
To: Brent Meeker
Subject: (offlist) RE: Observer-Moment Measure from Universe Measure
Hi Brent,
Of course science
Rich writes
Another hypothetical. In 1939, let's say, a writer comes up with a sci-fi
story, which is published the next year. It involves (let's say) a uranium
bomb and a beryllium target in the Arizona desert that might blow up and
cause problems for everyone. His main character is a
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 04:22:07PM -0700, Hal Finney wrote:
Russell Standish recently mentioned his paper Why Occam's Razor which
can be found at http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks/docs/occam/ . Among
other things he aims to derive quantum mechanics from a Schmidhuber type
ensemble. I have
In order: 2,1,5,3,4.
--Stathis Papaioannou
All,
Another hypothetical. In 1939, let's say, a writer comes up with a sci-fi
story, which is published the next year. It involves (let's say) a uranium
bomb and a beryllium target in the Arizona desert that might blow up and
cause problems for
I remembered Wei Dai posting on this topic in the early days of this
list, and indeed some of his postings influenced my Why Occam's
Razor paper. However, I do not recall his suggestions as being as
detailed as what you describe here. Do you have a reference to where
this might be written up? I'm
At 09:01 PM 6/5/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
In order: 2,1,5,3,4.
--Stathis Papaioannou
Thanks to Lee and Stathis--
Anyone else?
R.
Lee Corbin writes (quoting Stathis):
I believe that tomorrow I will become one of the people in the
multiverse
who believe they are me and share my memories.
What if you have just taken Midazolam, and so won't remember
any of this tomorrow? (I contend that you'll be them anyway.)
[Good
Russell Standish writes:
I remembered Wei Dai posting on this topic in the early days of this
list, and indeed some of his postings influenced my Why Occam's
Razor paper. However, I do not recall his suggestions as being as
detailed as what you describe here. Do you have a reference to where
Re the hypotheses---Social scientists, astronomers and CSI agents are the
only ones I'm aware of who routinely evaluate events after the fact. The
best, IMHO, such as the historian Toynbee, fit facts to a model. At it's
worst, the model becomes the event and before long we're deep in
I sometimes get into arguments with anti-science associates, who are into
wholism, mysticism, spiritualism and so forth. They think that scientists
are an elite with their own brand of 'ism (scientism, perhaps), which is no
more valid than these other 'isms. I point out to these people that if
Hal Finney writes:
There are a few unintuitive consequences, though, such as that large
instantiations of OMs will have more measure than small ones, and likewise
slow ones will have more measure than fast ones. This is because in each
case the interpretation program can be smaller if it is
At 12:16 AM 6/6/2005, you wrote:
I sometimes get into arguments with anti-science associates, who are into
wholism, mysticism, spiritualism and so forth. They think that scientists
are an elite with their own brand of 'ism (scientism, perhaps), which is
no more valid than these other 'isms. I
At 03:40 PM 6/5/2005, you wrote:
RM writes
(snip)
Now, pick one:
1. All a Big Coincidence Proving Nothing (ABCPN)
2. The writer obviously was privy to state secrets
and should have been arrested.
3. Suggests precognition of a very strange and weird sort.
4. Might fit a QM many worlds
A couple of hours ago, I was speaking to a young man who informed me that he
can predict the future: he has visions or dreams, and they turn out to be
true. I asked him for an example of this ability. He thought for a moment,
explaining that there were really far too many examples to choose
26 matches
Mail list logo