On 13 Nov 2013, at 23:09, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/13/2013 10:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 18:45, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's
just
On 11 Nov 2013, at 20:21, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/11/2013 1:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but if I live infinitely long I will have almost all my
experiences older than 75. So when I note that I'm not that old
and that seems
On 13 Nov 2013, at 00:33, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and
die in less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
Well it's cool asserting things... but you should develop more,
On 12 Nov 2013, at 18:15, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Both with Comp and with Everett-QM we have lost that unique
theoretical evidence, because our best current explanation (comp,
or QM) makes that mind-brain identity non sensical.
I don't see anything
On 12 Nov 2013, at 18:45, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's
just not human experience and when you stop having human
experience you're dead.
Why? If by
On 11/13/2013 10:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 18:45, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human
experience and when you stop having
On 12 Nov 2013, at 03:38, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 14:14, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 4:29 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:35, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a
rip off from An Age by Brian Aldiss).
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just
not human experience and when you stop having human experience
you're dead.
Why? If by dying we remember being something different from human, I
would still feel like I am
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from
the fact you, and every body you've ever heard of died before reaching age
150?
That observation is
Also, I found this related thread on QTI, archived by James Higgo, which
took place on this list many years ago:
http://higgo.com/qti/rplaga.htm
Jason
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 2:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Both with Comp and with Everett-QM we have lost that unique theoretical evidence,
because our best current explanation (comp, or QM) makes that mind-brain identity non
sensical.
I don't see anything about QM that makes mind is what a brain does
On 11/12/2013 2:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:35, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
Oh, right, like the
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not human
experience and when you stop having human experience you're dead.
Why? If by dying we remember being something different
On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
So I'll ask you the same thing I asked Quentin, what's you inference from
the fact
you, and
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Benjamin
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:14 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in
On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 7:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11,
On 11/12/2013 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 11:30 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 11:15 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 10:24 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of being alive,
probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the future, and that can become
arbitrarily small,
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
being alive, probability is only meaningful between two moments...
But there's a probability of being alive at time t in the
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
being
alive, probability is only
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA, and I find that absurd, there is no absolute probability of
being alive, probability is only
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:23 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
This is ASSA,
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Liz wrote: (and I try to interject my remarks in plain lettering)
*Sequence is determinative because that's how the universe works. *
I would say: how WE explain the workings of the universe (- rather
Multiverse).
* Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, creeps in this petty pace from day
to day,
On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily
continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs. So we're
down to the
question of what constitutes a 1p POV.
I know what is my own,
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
So we're down to the question of what constitutes a 1p
2013/11/13 Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
So
2013/11/12 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
Well it's cool asserting things... but you should develop more, all I'm
saying is that if MWI is true, the argument
On 13 November 2013 10:30, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
But that's part of what bothers me about this idea. How
crippled/brain-damaged can you be and still count as a continuation? Are
there degrees of continuation? If so, why can't the degrees asymptote to
zero?
That bothers me
On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
A pretty bold statement. I don't see that the laws of physics require this
- there must be a
Le 12 nov. 2013 22:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net a écrit :
On 11/12/2013 1:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 1:02 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/12 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/12/2013 12:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux
On 13 November 2013 11:16, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Liz wrote: (and I try to interject my remarks in plain lettering)
*Sequence is determinative because that's how the universe works. *
I would say: how WE explain the workings of the universe (- rather
Multiverse).
Yes of
On 13 November 2013 11:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is just that there is a continuation of 1p POVs.
So we're down to the question of
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:15 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Both with Comp and with Everett-QM we have lost that unique theoretical
evidence, because our best current explanation (comp, or QM) makes that
mind-brain identity non
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that; everything has 'experience', it's just not
human experience and when you stop having human experience
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
I guess that settles it.
Jason
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
On 11/12/2013 4:13 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 11:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/12/2013 1:57 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
So *you* Quentin Anciaux (incidentally, how do pronounce that?) don't
necessarily continue. It is
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
A pretty bold statement. I
On 11/12/2013 4:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience may be like that;
On 11/12/2013 5:14 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
mailto:yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:18 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 4:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Nov 2013, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote:
Experience
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:20 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 5:14 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:57 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 November 2013 11:12, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of
On 11/12/2013 5:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from anesthesia.
Did you leave out a no? There is a continuation, but not of consciousness.
Would you say the same true for an amnesiac being anesthetized?
I think so. An amnesiac is
On 13 November 2013 14:09, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.comwrote:
Every one of the perhaps inifinite copies of you will grow old and die in
less than 150 years.
There is no quantum immortality
I guess that settles
Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your
life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other
universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I
understand to be incorrect, your copies will grow old and die in every
On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your
life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other
universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse, which I
My email service does not allow me to interleave comments.
Regarding your reply, the laws of biophysics does MANDATE growing old and
dying.
I think the more advanced understanding of the multiverse is that
incredibly unlikely things do not happen.
As I recall the argument was based on
On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
mailto:yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your
life in
one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other
On 13 November 2013 16:51, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
My email service does not allow me to interleave comments.
Well in that case maybe you could cut and paste the relevant quote. There
was an awful lot of text after your comment, I still have no idea what you
were replying to.
On 13 November 2013 17:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end
your life in one universe does not guarranttee that
On 11/12/2013 8:08 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 17:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
mailto:yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple. Shooting
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:12 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 5:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from
anesthesia.
Did you leave out a no?
It was intentional, I meant there is a continuation, as in subjectively
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple. Shooting yourself with a gun or whatever means you use to end your
life in one universe does not guarranttee that you do not grow in all other
universes. Unless the laws of physics differ across the multiverse,
On 11/12/2013 9:38 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:12 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 5:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
There is a continuation from being anesthetized to waking up from
anesthesia.
Did you
On 13 November 2013 17:20, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 8:08 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 17:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/12/2013 7:28 PM, LizR wrote:
On 13 November 2013 16:19, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple. Shooting
On 11 November 2013 18:18, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but the thing is that *you have to*, and asking such question at
that
On 09 Nov 2013, at 20:13, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently well.
if not he might degrade and eventually ... die. This makes no sense
to me. It is annoying, but we can degrade a lot, yet we can't die
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but the thing is that *you have to*, and asking such question at
that stage is very likely...
Oops I meant OR a googol years, of course.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group,
On 11 November 2013 22:47, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but the thing is that
On 10 Nov 2013, at 19:31, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/9/2013 11:37 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently
well. if not he might degrade and eventually
On 11/11/2013 12:11 AM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 18:18, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/11/2013 12:11 AM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 18:18, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux
On 11/11/2013 1:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but if I live infinitely long I will have almost all my experiences
older than
75. So when I note that I'm not that old and that seems improbable,
The thing is as I said is that you have to be *first* 75 before being older...
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/11/2013 1:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but if I live infinitely long I will have almost all my
experiences older than 75. So when I note that I'm not that old and that
seems improbable,
The thing is as I said is that you have to be
On 11/11/2013 10:42 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/11/2013 12:11 AM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 18:18, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM,
On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen, only being
10¹⁰⁰ is likely, it's just non-sense, your life is not
random sampled, yesterday happen before today and before tomorrow. That doesn't
2013/11/11 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen,
only being 10¹⁰⁰ is likely, it's just
non-sense, your life is not random sampled, yesterday happen
On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen,
only being 10¹⁰⁰ is likely, it's just
non-sense, your life is not random sampled,
On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen, only
being
On 12 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 11:21 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
You find you every day, according to you, every day should not happen,
only
Actually, if you were Billy Pilgrim, you would know immediately you fell
into the chronosyncinastic infundibulum (sp?) whether you were quantum
immortal or not, because the chances would be infinitesimal of ending up in
the first N years of your life, where N is *any* finite value. In fact
On 11/11/2013 4:29 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013
On 11/11/2013 4:39 PM, LizR wrote:
Actually, if you were Billy Pilgrim, you would know immediately you fell into the
chronosyncinastic infundibulum (sp?) whether you were quantum immortal or not, because
the chances would be infinitesimal of ending up in the first N years of your life, where
N
On 12 November 2013 14:16, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 4:39 PM, LizR wrote:
Actually, if you were Billy Pilgrim, you would know immediately you fell
into the chronosyncinastic infundibulum (sp?) whether you were quantum
immortal or not, because the chances would be
On 12 November 2013 14:14, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 4:29 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 3:39 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 09:37, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 11:21
On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip off from An Age
by Brian Aldiss). Presumably according to QTI he's at the end of an infinite future
lifetime, or whatever? But since he's
On 12 November 2013 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip
off from An Age by Brian Aldiss). Presumably according to QTI he's at the
end
On 11/11/2013 7:35 PM, LizR wrote:
On 12 November 2013 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/11/2013 6:38 PM, LizR wrote:
Benjamin Button lived his life in reverse.
Oh, right, like the guy in Martin Amis' Time's Arrow (itself a rip
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:37 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently well. if
not he might degrade and eventually ... die. This
On 11/9/2013 11:37 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently well. if not
he might
degrade and eventually ...
On 11/10/2013 9:25 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:37 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
2013/11/10 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/9/2013 11:37 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently well. if
not he might degrade and
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/11/10 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/9/2013 11:37 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but the thing is that *you have to*, and asking such question at
that stage is very likely... you can't be 10⁵ years old before having been
1 year old... it's simply
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:48 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/10/2013 9:25 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:37 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11/10/2013 5:59 PM, LizR wrote:
On 11 November 2013 13:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 11/10/2013 3:54 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Sure, but the thing is that *you have to*, and asking such question at that
stage
is very likely... you
On 08 Nov 2013, at 20:10, Richard Ruquist wrote:
The 10^120 bits for the holographic visible universe is based on the
Planck Scale
and is the number of Planck Areas on its surface.
Penrose estimates that it will maximize
at 10^122 in the future.
Yes, but with comp, the visible universe is
On 08 Nov 2013, at 22:16, Jason Resch wrote:
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 07 Nov 2013, at 00:51, LizR wrote:
I was thinking specifically of Max Tegmark's MUH. He considers
minds to be subsystems of the maths - he doesn't say anything
On 09 Nov 2013, at 00:22, Jason Resch wrote:
Liz,
That is very interesting. Do you remember anything about this
interview (where it was, who was interviewing him, etc.)?
One answer is in this very list. I think that it was in an early
(interesting) thread Amoeba Croaks. I don't know
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently well. if not he might
degrade and eventually ... die. This makes no sense to me. It is annoying, but we can
degrade a lot, yet we can't die (with just comp, or, ITSM, with just the quantum
On 10 November 2013 08:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/9/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Tegmark thinks he will survive, if the gun works sufficiently well. if not
he might degrade and eventually ... die. This makes no sense to me. It is
annoying, but we can degrade a lot,
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
