### Re: One more question about measure

On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 03:25:29PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: Perhaps. It depends of your definition of OM, and of your everything theory. Let me tell you the Lobian's answer: if I have a successor OM then I have a successor OM which has no successor OM. OK, I am cheating here, but

### Re: One more question about measure

Le 26-juin-05, à 03:22, Quentin Anciaux a écrit : Le Samedi 25 Juin 2005 18:51, Bruno Marchal a écrit : Not really because you assume our eyes are bounded. Any finite machine running forever recurs but not infinite or universal one. Bruno Yes I assume my eyes are bounded... because they

### RE: How much unfortunate is Jack? (was: the copy and the chair (was: torture yet

Of course you are right: there is no way to distinguish the original from the copy, given that the copying process works as intended. And if you believe that everything possible exists, then there will always be at least one version of you who will definitely experience whatever outcome you are

### Have all possible events occurred?

Stathis Papaioannou writes: Of course you are right: there is no way to distinguish the original from the copy, given that the copying process works as intended. And if you believe that everything possible exists, then there will always be at least one version of you who will definitely

### Re: One more question about measure

Le 26-juin-05, à 08:47, Russell Standish a écrit : On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 03:25:29PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: Perhaps. It depends of your definition of OM, and of your everything theory. Let me tell you the Lobian's answer: if I have a successor OM then I have a successor OM which has

### Re: One more question about measure

Le 26-juin-05, à 08:47, Russell Standish a écrit : On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 03:25:29PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: Perhaps. It depends of your definition of OM, and of your everything theory. Let me tell you the Lobian's answer: if I have a successor OM then I have a successor OM which

### RE: Torture yet again

Bruno wrote Le 23-juin-05, ? 05:38, Lee Corbin a ?crit : you *can* be in two places at the same time. From a third person pov: OK. From a first person pov: how? Right. From a first person... you cannot be. This further illustrates the limitations of the first person account, its

### RE: the copy and the chair (was: torture yet again)

Stathis has another good thought experiment. You are in a room strapped to an electric chair with a counter counting down from one minute. There are two buttons accessible to you on the chair, marked A and B. Pressing button A will cause the chair either to release you, with Pr=0.4, or

### RE: another puzzle

Here is yet another delightful Stathis experiment that I fished up from about ten days ago: Hal wrote Stathis Papaioannou writes: You find yourself in a locked room with no windows, and no memory of how you got there. The room is sparsely furnished: a chair, a desk, pen and paper, and

### RE: another puzzle

Lee Corbin wrote: If I, on the other hand, knew that this wonderful room was going to be available to me on a specific date, I would collect all my favorite movies, my best books, some certain chemicals that it is best not to describe in detail, and would look forward to the most wonderful

### RE: another puzzle

Jesse writes Lee Corbin wrote: If I, on the other hand, knew that this wonderful room was going to be available to me on a specific date,... I would enthusiastically pay a good fraction of my net worth for this opportunity. Why? Why would I do it? Because logic grabs me by the

### Re: Have all possible events occurred?

At 10:22 AM 6/26/2005, Norman Samish wrote: Stathis Papaioannou writes: Of course you are right: there is no way to distinguish the original from the copy, given that the copying process works as intended. And if you believe that everything possible exists, then there will always be at least

### RE: another puzzle

Lee Corbin wrote: Jesse writes Lee Corbin wrote: If I, on the other hand, knew that this wonderful room was going to be available to me on a specific date,... I would enthusiastically pay a good fraction of my net worth for this opportunity. Why? Why would I do it? Because logic

### Hilgard's hidden observer

Dear Richard, Let me follow up on your suggestion: Assuming a personality is made up of multiple modules,does it necessarily follow that a hidden observer exist as a seperate entiry, or could it be that the usual single personality results from an entrainment (the modules become like

### More is Better (was RE: another puzzle)

Jesse writes First, I think that it's important to remove the qualifier identical here. Would two copies cease to be identical if one atom were out of place? I meant something more like running the same program Okay, that's fine. On another tack, you are the same person, etc., that

### RE: More is Better (was RE: another puzzle)

Lee Corbin wrote: Jesse writes First, I think that it's important to remove the qualifier identical here. Would two copies cease to be identical if one atom were out of place? I meant something more like running the same program Okay, that's fine. On another tack, you are the same

### Re: another puzzzle

Eric Cavalcanti wrote: I do not equate my identity with the matter that composes my body at all. I would say that my personal identity cannot be defined in a communicable way, in the way I see it. I believe there is something fundamental about consciousness. If you don't equate your

### RE: Have all possible events occurred?

Norman Samish writes: Stathis Papaioannou writes: Of course you are right: there is no way to distinguish the original from the copy, given that the copying process works as intended. And if you believe that everything possible exists, then there will always be at least one version of you

### RE: More is Better (was RE: another puzzle)

Jesse writes It's *not* aesthetic whether, say, George Bush is you or not. He's definitely not! He doesn't have your memories, for the first thing. It's simply objectively true that some programs---or some clumps of biological matter---are Jesse Mazur and others are not. (Even though

### RE: Torture yet again

Lee Corbin writes: The objective view, which brings us much more into alignment with what is actually the case, is, as always, the third-person point of view. A good historical analogy is this: to really understand the planets, moons, and sun, it was necessary to totally abandon the

### RE: Torture yet again

Stathis writes same here; if you are interested in knowing what the case is, and not merely what the appearances are, then you have to understand that you are a physical process, and it may so happen that you execute in different places, and in different times, and that overlaps are

### Re: Hilgard's hidden observer

At 03:44 PM 6/26/2005, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Richard, Let me follow up on your suggestion: Assuming a personality is made up of multiple modules,does it necessarily follow that a hidden observer exist as a seperate entiry, or could it be that the usual single personality results

### Re: Have all possible events occurred?

R. Miller writes: Stathis Papaioannou writes: Of course you are right: there is no way to distinguish the original from the copy, given that the copying process works as intended. And if you believe that everything possible exists, then there will always be at least one version of you who

### Re: Have all possible events occurred?

Norman Samish writes: Stathis, when you say if you believe that everything possible exists are you implying that everything possible need NOT exist (thus refuting Tegmark)? Wouldn't this mean that space-time was not infinite? What hypothesis could explain finite space-time? Brent Meeker

### Re: Have all possible events occurred?

At 11:07 PM 6/26/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: R. Miller writes: Stathis Papaioannou writes: Of course you are right: there is no way to distinguish the original from the copy, given that the copying process works as intended. And if you believe that everything possible exists, then there

### Re: Have all possible events occurred?

Stephen Paul King, Thanks for your kind reply, which I am struggling with. You seem to be saying that something can exist yet not occur. Whether it occurs depends on relations and context. Can you give me supporting information, hopefully intelligible to one who does not have degrees in

### RE: Have all possible events occurred?

-Original Message- From: Norman Samish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 4:33 AM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Have all possible events occurred? Norman Samish writes: Stathis, when you say if you believe that everything possible exists are you