Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Bruno Marchal
Brent, Nick, On 31 Mar 2011, at 03:06, meekerdb wrote: On 3/30/2011 3:15 PM, Nick Prince wrote: In Russell’s book there is a section on “Arguments against QTI” And I want to put forward some issues arising from this. It seems that (if MWI is true) we live in world(s) in which we appear to

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Nick Prince nickmag.pri...@googlemail.com wrote: In Russell’s book there is a section on “Arguments against QTI” And I want to put forward some issues arising from this. It seems that (if MWI is true) we live in world(s) in which we appear to live a finite,

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: This is a variant of an argument that David Parfit uses in his book Reasons and Persons, where he considers a continuum from his mind to that of Napoleon. (Don't flame me if I get the details wrong - the essence

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 31 Mar 2011, at 13:53, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Nick Prince nickmag.pri...@googlemail.com wrote: In Russell’s book there is a section on “Arguments against QTI” And I want to put forward some issues arising from this. It seems that (if MWI is true) we

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Stephen Paul King
-Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 8:52 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Is QTI false? On 31 Mar 2011, at 13:53, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Nick Prince nickmag.pri...@googlemail.com wrote: In

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 31 Mar 2011, at 15:35, Stephen Paul King wrote: -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 8:52 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Is QTI false? On 31 Mar 2011, at 13:53, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:15 AM,

Re: Causality = 1p Continuity?

2011-03-31 Thread Stephen Paul King
-Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 12:33 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Is QTI false? On 31 Mar 2011, at 15:35, Stephen Paul King wrote: snip *** Hi! There seems to be a conflation of the ideas of the continuity of 1st

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Nick Prince
On Mar 31, 1:43 am, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: The observation that other people never seem to live beyond a certain age is not evidence against the NCDSC. Only logical impossibility can count. Even physical impossibility is insufficient, because there is always the

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Nick Prince
Bruno wrote With both QTI and COMP-TI we cannot go from being very old to being a   baby. We can may be get slowly younger and younger in a more   continuous way, by little backtracking. We always survive in the most   normal world compatible with our states. But some kind of jumps are   not

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Nick Prince
Stathis wrote That we don't see extremely old people is consistent with QTI, since from the third person perspective rare events such as living to a great age happen only rarely. However, from the first person perspective you will live to a great age, and this will happen in the most

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Nick Prince nickmag.pri...@googlemail.com wrote: Stathis wrote That we don't see extremely old people is consistent with QTI, since from the third person perspective rare events such as living to a great age happen only rarely. However, from the first person

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Johnathan Corgan
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Or something like that. Quantum logic (and also its arithmetical form) has many notion of implication. The one above is the closer to the Sazaki Hook which Hardegree used to show that orthomodularity in quantum

Re: Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread meekerdb
On 03/31/11, Nick Princenickmag.pri...@googlemail.com wrote:Bruno wrote With both QTI and COMP-TI we cannot go from being very old to being a baby. We can may be get slowly younger and younger in a more continuous way, by little backtracking. We always survive in the most normal world

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread stephenk
On Mar 31, 8:10 pm, meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 03/31/11,Nick Princenickmag.pri...@googlemail.comwrote:Bruno wrote With both QTI and COMP-TI we cannot go from being very old to being a   baby. We can may be get slowly younger and younger in a more   continuous way, by little

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Russell Standish
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 02:52:44PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is here that if we apply Bayes' theorem (like in the Doomday argument), we should be astonished not being already very old (from our first person perspective). But Bayes cannot be applied in this setting, as we have already

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread meekerdb
On 3/31/2011 5:58 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 02:52:44PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: It is here that if we apply Bayes' theorem (like in the Doomday argument), we should be astonished not being already very old (from our first person perspective). But Bayes cannot be

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Russell Standish
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:52:25PM -0500, meekerdb wrote: Standish, and weighted by the universal prior, giving more weight to being a baby than an adult. Is that assuming that QM uncertainty increases to the future but not the past:? Brent In QM, the state evolves unitarily, which

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread meekerdb
On 3/31/2011 10:08 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:52:25PM -0500, meekerdb wrote: Standish, and weighted by the universal prior, giving more weight to being a baby than an adult. Is that assuming that QM uncertainty increases to the future but not the past:?

Re: Is QTI false?

2011-03-31 Thread Russell Standish
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:20:58PM -0500, meekerdb wrote: Couldn't the person have been born at different times too? QM Hamiltonians are time symmetric. If you try to infer the past you also have unitary evolution - just in the other direction. So I'm wondering where the arrow of time