RE: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds

To me, the Many-Minds interpretation requires significant changes in frames of reference. Suppose you view a particular world out of many as a 2-dimensional surface. Layers of surfaces comprise the local environment of a particular section of Many Worlds. Now think of a behavior pattern as a set

RE: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jason Resch Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 11:38 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 8:07 PM, rmiller wrote: To me, the

RE: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds

-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 2:20 PM To: Everything List Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds On Feb 22, 8:12 pm, "rmiller" wrote: > From: ev

RE: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds

-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:43 PM To: Everything List Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds > > Good point, but among the many fates there is always the optim

RE: A paper by Bas C. van Fraassen

Good article and, as I see it, a barely-concealed challenge to actually come up with an experiment that will prove or disprove MWI. I’ve seen a few on the Los Alamos site from time to time, but nothing that wraps it up. And Young’s experiment shouldn’t count. From: everything-list@googlegroup

Re: language, cloning and thought experiments

At 07:31 AM 3/6/2009, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >2009/3/6 Jack Mallah wrote: > > >> If you're not worried about the fair trade, > then to be consistent you shouldn't be worried > about the unfair trade either. In the fair > trade, one version of you A disappears > overnight, and a new versio

Re: Changing the past by forgetting

At 06:20 PM 3/15/2009, George Levy wrote: >I agree with Anna. In addition, it all depends on where you define >the boundary of the self. Just the brain? Brain + body? Brain + body >+ immediate surrounding (prescription glasses being worn, automobile >being driven, binoculars or computer being us

RE: Why I am I?

From: John Mikes [mailto:jami...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:00 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Why I am I? I admire this list. Somebody asks a silly question and 'we' write hourlong wisdom(s) upon it. After my deep liking of Stathis's "what d

Re: Probability

At 10:54 AM 11/6/2008, Bruno Marchal wrote: >On 06 Nov 2008, at 02:37, Thomas Laursen wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone, I am a complete layman but still got the illusion that > > maybe one day I would be able to understand the probability part of MW > > if explained in a simple way. I know it's the

3D Time

All, You may find this interesting.<> Back in the early 1990s I corresponded with astronomer William Tifft at the U of Ariz. (Flagstaff). Seems he had possibly found evidence of q

Re: 3D Time

At 10:04 PM 7/18/2005, rmiller wrote: All, You may find this interesting.<<http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:eVk8dYC9J44J:psroc.phys.ntu.edu.tw/cjp/v28/215.pdf+Lehto+physics+time&hl=en>> Back in the early 1990s I corresponded with astronomer William Tifft at the U of

Re: contention: theories are incompatible

At 10:14 PM 11/16/2005, James N Rose wrote: An open hypothesis to list members: "Conservation" as a 'fundamental rule of condition' is incompatible and antithetical with any notions of "many worlds". Either explicitly excludes and precludes the other; can't have both and retain a consistent exi

Re: Lobian Machine

ical constructs, specifically, proof of N requires knowledge of non-N. As I'm sure you know, sanity is a *legal*, rather than a mathematical term. While this sort of logical fuzziness is probably in keeping with these times, I doubt if it really applies to Godel's theorem. RMiller

Re: Technical paper on 3-dimensional time

At 01:23 PM 1/23/2006, Johnathan Corgan wrote: Marc Geddes wrote: > This is very recent (late 2005): > http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0510010 I've read this and the author's prior two papers on multi-dimensional time. (snip) All, Finnish physicist Ari Lehto wrote about 3D time way back in 199

Quantum accident survivor

It would seem that there are a finite number of ways to survive (or die in) any given car accident. It that's the case, the number of many world branches would be limited by this value. Taken longitudinally, it would seem that the architecture of the world lines of these and similar events wou

Re: Frank Flynn

It's a chatterbot. Considering the poor syntax and misspelled words, it was probably designed by a Russian teen. RMiller

Re: An All/Nothing multiverse model

This is starting to sound like discussion Hume must have had with himself. RM

Sociological approach

wondering why we can't visit the next room, when in fact, we inhabit the entire neighborhood. RMiller

Re: Sociological approach

Patrick-- At 05:04 AM 5/23/2005, you wrote: On Sun, 22 May 2005, rmiller wrote: I'm approaching this as a sociologist with some physics background so I'm focusing on what the behavior system perceives ("measures"). If all possible worlds exist in a superpositi

Re: Sociological approach

At 07:29 PM 5/23/2005, you wrote: I think I can answer to the whole message by saying "no way" isn't always "the way". The EPR paradox was supposed to prove quantum theory was wrong because it supposedly violated relativity. Alain Aspect proved that EPR actually worked as advertised, however it

RE: Sociological approach

At 07:15 AM 5/24/2005, you wrote: Richard M writes > I remember Plaga's original post on the Los Alamos > archives way back when the server there was a 386. > Most of the methods I've seen--Plaga's, Fred Alan > Wolf's, and others involve tweaking the mortar, so > to speak---prying apart the wal

Re: Plaga

All, In my recent post I noted that Plaga's article has been on the xxx site since their server was a 386. I want to be clear that my comment was not meant as a dig at Plaga, nor his paper--just that it has been around since '95 and I can't recall anyone commenting (constructively) on it. As

Re: Plaga

verse quantum communication should be impossible. Hal Finney I don't recall that discussion; may not have been a list subscriber at that time. At any rate, thanks for the info. RMiller

RE: Sociological approach, luck, and the WTC surge cloud

tists fail to study things not because it's worth studying, but because no one drops a wad of $1000 bills on their desk beforehand---and agrees to build a new Faculty Lounge over the old tritium "storage" pit behind the maintenance shed. RMiller

Re: Plaga

At 06:58 PM 5/24/2005, rmiller wrote: In a recent post (5/24) I wrote. . . I would suggest re Plaga or anyone else discussed here, it's not the time spent in a particular academic trench that makes the idea great, it's the quality of the insight. As luck, coincidence or a wid

Re: time sampling

receiver has been around a long while, but this was the first I'd heard of consciousness as a wave function sampling various areas of block space. Anyone happen to know the source of this concept? RMiller

experience = sum over histories?

At 11:20 AM 6/2/2005, Hal Finney wrote: (snip) All these examples are meant to show that we act as though we care about giving good experiences even though we know they will be forgotten and not have lasting impact. If we extend that principle more generally, I think it follows that we should t

Equivalence

Equivalence If the individual exists simultaneously across a many-world manifold, then how can one even define a "copy?" If the words match at some points and differ at others, then the personality would at a maximum, do likewise---though this is not necessary---or, for some perhaps, not even

Re: Functionalism and People as Programs

At 11:20 PM 6/2/2005, Lee Corbin wrote: Stephen writes > I really do not want to be a stick-in-the-mud here, but what do we base > the idea that "copies" could exist upon? It is a conjecture called "functionalism" (or one of its close variants). "Functionalism," at least, in the social

Re: Equivalence

uspect there is a topology where regions of decoherence coexist and border regions of coherence. An optics experiment might be able to test this (if it hasn't been done already), and it might be experimentally testable as a psychology experiment. RM - Original Message - From: &qu

Re: Equivalence

At 11:27 AM 6/3/2005, rmiller wrote: At 10:23 AM 6/3/2005, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear R., You make a very good point, one that I was hoping to communicate but failed. The notion of making copies is only coherent if and when we can compare the copied produce to each other. Failing to be

Re: Equivalence

At 01:46 PM 6/3/2005, rmiller wrote: (snip) What do you mean by "the qualia approach"? Do you mean a sort of dualistic view of the relationship between mind and matter? From the discussion at http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/rhett.html it seems that Sarfatti suggests some combination

Re: Do things constantly get bigger?

At 01:28 PM 6/3/2005, Norman Samish wrote: Hal, Your phrase ". . . constantly get bigger" reminds me of Mark McCutcheon's "The Final Theory" where he revives a notion that gravity is caused by the expansion of atoms. Norman That's the excuse I use. RM - Original Message - From:

Re: Equivalence

At 04:40 PM 6/3/2005, rmiller wrote: At 03:25 PM 6/3/2005, you wrote: (snip) I spoke with Schmidt in '96. He told me that it is very unlikely that causation can be reversed, but rather that the retropk results suggest many worlds. But that is presumably just his personal intuition

Re: Functionalism and People as Programs

At 10:58 PM 6/3/2005, you wrote: R. Miller writes (quoting Lee Corbin): If someone can teleport me back and forth from work to home, I'll be happy to go along even if 1 atom in every thousand cells of mine doesn't get copied. Exposure to a nuclear detonation at 4000 yds typically kills about

RE: Functionalism and People as Programs

At 12:36 PM 6/4/2005, Lee Corbin wrote: R. Miller writes > Lee Corbin wrote: > > Exposure to a nuclear detonation at 4000 yds typically kills about 1 in a > million cells. When that happens, you die. I would suggest that is a bad > metaphor. Well, my numbers, above, are *entirely* differe

Hypothetical shaman's dilemma

Here's a hypothetical situation. Your plane goes down in the wilds and you're rescued by a tribe indigenous to the area. You're wearing the latest clothes from the GAP, so the tribe elders decide you're a candidate for shaman apprentice--a position that comes with nice lodging and pays well i

Another Tedious Hypothetical

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

Another tedious hypothetical

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

Re: Another Tedious Hypothetical

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

RE: Another Tedious Hypothetical

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.

Hypotheses

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 reificati

RE: Down with Scientism

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 p

RE: Another tedious hypothetical

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 w

RE: Hypotheses

At 12:50 AM 6/6/2005, you wrote: 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 reall

RE: Hypotheses

At 12:50 AM 6/6/2005, you wrote: 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 fa

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 03:01 PM 6/6/2005, Pete Carlton wrote: (snip) The point is, there are enough stories published in any year that it would be a trivial matter to find a few superficial resemblances between any event and a story that came before it. Let's look a little closer at the story in terms of gesta

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 03:01 PM 6/6/2005, Pete Carlton wrote: (snip) The point is, there are enough stories published in any year that it would be a trivial matter to find a few superficial resemblances between any event and a story that came before it. my second comment. . .if it's such a trivial matter, then per

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 03:58 PM 6/6/2005, you wrote: rmiller wrote: At 03:01 PM 6/6/2005, Pete Carlton wrote: (snip) The point is, there are enough stories published in any year that it would be a trivial matter to find a few superficial resemblances between any event and a story that came before it. Let&#

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 06:56 PM 6/6/2005, you wrote: Jesse has it right on here, and one can go even further in this vein.  You are impressed by the relationship between one particular story and one particular event - but you hand-picked both the story and the event for discussion here because of their superficial s

The tedious hypothesis and the reason for it. . .

All, My tedious complaint about scientists prejudging issues prior to analysis ("the facts don't warrant. . .etc") extends beyond the superficially weird (Heinlein's story) to the comparatively normal. While I'm not suggesting anyone who does this routinely is anything other than merely disint

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 02:45 PM 6/7/2005, Jesse Mazer wrote: (snip) Of course in this example Feynman did not anticipate in advance what licence plate he'd see, but the kind of "hindsight bias" you are engaging in can be shown with another example. Suppose you pick 100 random words out of a dictionary, and then

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 05:22 PM 6/8/2005, Jesse Mazer wrote: rmiller wrote: At 02:45 PM 6/7/2005, Jesse Mazer wrote: (snip) Of course in this example Feynman did not anticipate in advance what licence plate he'd see, but the kind of "hindsight bias" you are engaging in can be shown with

Re: Another tedious hypothetical

At 11:08 PM 6/8/2005, Jesse Mazer wrote: (snip) You should instead calculate the probability that a story would contain *any* combination of meaningful words associated with the Manhattan project. This is exactly analogous to the fact that in my example, you should have been calculating the pr

RE: Many Pasts? Not according to QM...

At 12:43 PM 6/11/2005, Hal Finney wrote: Here's a little tongue-in-cheek rant... (snip) Yet how many philosophers are willing to seriously consider abandoning this arbitrary conditioning in deciding what is right and wrong? How many of us here are willing to take the logical path to its ultimat

Re: more torture

At 06:00 AM 6/13/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: I have been arguing in recent posts that the absolute measure of an observer moment (or observer, if you prefer) makes no possible difference at the first person level. A counterargument has been that, even if an observer cannot know how many in

RE: more torture

At 11:03 AM 6/15/2005, Jesse Mazer wrote: I wrote: No, I don't think they don't all have to have the same volume, Whoops, weird double negative here...that should read "I don't think they all have to have the same volume". Jesse "must have" "should have" "are required to have" RM

Re: another puzzzle

At 09:12 AM 6/16/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 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 in one corner a light. RM: You've just described me at work in my office. The light is

Re: another puzzzle

At 09:12 AM 6/16/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: You find yourself in a locked room with no windows, and no memory of how you got there. \ (snip) The other state consists of 10^100 exact copies of you, their minds perfectly synchronised with your mind, each copy isolated from all the othe

Re: death

At 10:55 AM 6/18/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: (snip) The above mechanism would still work even if, as in my thought experiment, there were 10^100 exact copies running in lockstep and all but one died. Each one of the 10^100-1 copies would experience continuity of consciousness through th

copy method important?

All, Though we're not discussing entanglement per se, some of these examples surely meet the criteria. So, my thought question for the day: is the method of copying important? Example #1: we start with a single marble, A. Then, we magically create a copy, marble B--perfectly like marb

Re: copy method important?

At 11:23 PM 6/18/2005, George Levy wrote: rmiller wrote: my thought question for the day: is the method of copying important? Example #1: we start with a single marble, A. Then, we magically create a copy, marble B--perfectly like marble B in every way. . .that is, the atoms are

New Scientist

All, New Scientist has a very interesting article this week about free will, reality and entanglement. Worth a look. Additionally, for the trivia fans among you, it seems one of the researchers quoted has clocked similarity effects associated with entanglement at something like (minimum) 10,0

singular versus plural

All-- The arguments here seem to assume a consensus experience, i.e. "Can't we all just agree on this set of evidence?" What if reality experienced by one in a closed room is fundamentally different that when experienced as a dyad, triad, or mob? No one (to my knowledge) has been able to refu

Re: another puzzzle

Jesse wrote In reality the molecules in your brain are constantly being recycled--if you believe that the changes that make up memories happen at the synapses, the article at http://www.sci-con.org/articles/20040601.html suggests all the molecules at the synapses are replaced in only 24 hou

RE: singular versus plural

At 06:44 AM 6/24/2005, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: (snip) So although it's not impossible that minds can somehow act as a group, that is something in need of *real* experimental evidence. Stacking a controversial theory on a weird idea balancing on an impossible situation is asking for trouble

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: Hilgard's "hidden observer"

anating from this area (resolved using a standard Fast Fourier Transform circuit.) By monitoring the wavelet coming from this area, one could determine the time of exit for an OOBE. Rich M Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: "rmiller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Hilgard's "hidden observer"

At 10:53 PM 6/26/2005, rmiller wrote: 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 en

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: Witnesses, Observer Moments and Memories of a Past

At 10:31 PM 6/28/2005, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Lee, Are you familiar with any of the experiments that have been performed regarding "quantum counterfactuals" or "null measurements"? It turns out that the fact that some particular measure *was not made* counts just as much, and thus a