-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 1:33 PM
To: Norman Samish
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: copy method important?
Le 18-juin-05, à 20:36, Norman Samish a écrit :
I'm no physicist, but doesn't Heisenberg's
Le 24-juin-05, à 01:03, Brent Meeker a écrit :
And then I recall I gave an exercise: show that with comp the
no-cloning theorem can easily be justified a priori from comp. As I
said this follows easily from the Universal dovetailer Argument.
But the UDA and the comp-hypothesis are not the
Tom Caylor writes:
Stathis wrote:
How is this basically different to surviving the next minute? You are
*far*
more likely to be dead almost everywhere in the universe than you are to
be
alive. The common sense answer to this would be that you survive the
next
minute due to the continuous
Stathis wrote:
quote: I don't think Hal Finney was agreeing with me, I think he was pointing out how absurd my position was to lead to this conclusion! But I don't really understand your objection: are you disagreeing that your consciousness will continue as long as there is a successor OM
Tom wrote:
quote:
I'm disagreeing that your consciousness will "continue" as long as there is a successor OM somewhere. You have to consider the possibility that the instances where there is a successor OM somewhere makes up a subset of measure zero of the set needed for continued
George Levy writes:
Psychological copying is much less stringent than Physical copying. It
requires that the person being copied feels the same as the original, a la
Turing test. This introduce the intriguing possibility of psychological
indeterminacy which allows me to regard myself as the
Le 18-juin-05, à 20:36, Norman Samish a écrit :
I'm no physicist, but doesn't Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle forbid
making exact quantum-level measurements, hence exact copies? If so, then
all this talk of making exact copies is fantasy.
Many good answers has been given. And my comment
Stathis wrote:
Scouring the universe to find an exact copy of RM's favourite marble may seem a very inefficient method of duplication, but when it comes to conscious observers in search of a successor OM, the obvious but nonetheless amazing fact is that nobody needs to search or somehow bring the
Hi,
Le Lundi 20 Juin 2005 18:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
What feature of the universe(s) causes you to be able to say that the dead
OM continues to be conscious rather than continues to be dead?
An OM (Observer Moment) by definition must contains a conscious observer... If
it's not the
Tom Caylor wrote:
Stathis wrote:
Scouring the universe to find an exact copy of RM's favourite marble may
seem a very inefficient method of duplication, but when it comes to
conscious observers in search of a successor OM, the obvious but
nonetheless amazing fact is that nobody needs to
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 02:02:01PM -0700, Hal Finney wrote:
In practice most people believe that consciousness does not depend
critically on quantum states, so making a copy of a person's mind would
not be affected by these considerations.
It is interesting that there is still no publicly
[EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:05 AM
Subject: 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
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
PROTECTED]
To: Stathis Papaioannou [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:05 AM
Subject: copy method important?
All,
Though we're not discussing entanglement per se, some of these examples
surely meet the criteria. So, my thought question
on Spam-Websites:
http://www.hillscapital.com/antispam/
- Original Message -
From: Norman Samish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 08:36 PM
Subject: Re: copy method important?
I'm no physicist, but doesn't Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
I'm no physicist, but doesn't Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle forbid
making exact quantum-level measurements, hence exact copies? If so, then
all this talk of making exact copies is fantasy.
Norman Samish
You can't *specifically* copy a quantum state, but you can create
systems in *every
.
Norman
- Original Message -
From: Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 2:02 PM
Subject: Re: copy method important?
I'm no physicist, but doesn't Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle forbid
making exact
Norman Samish writes:
Isn't it possible that decision processes of the brain, hence
consciousness, DOES depend critically on quantum states?
Yes, it's possible. There is a school of thought which advances this
position. Penrose, Hamerhoff are a couple of the names, off the top
of my
-Original Message-
From: Norman Samish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 11:20 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: copy method important?
Hal,
Isn't it possible that decision processes of the brain, hence
consciousness, DOES depend critically
19 matches
Mail list logo
