From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Tue Nov 12 2002 - 13:30:50 MST
John Clark wrote:
> "Rafal Smigrodzki" <rms2g@virginia.edu> Wrote:
>
> > Gts defines his identity only in relation to identical copies
>
> Definitions are not important, the opinion of the original is not
> important, the opinion of copies is important if in their opinion
> they are gts.
### If the copies inherit gts's definition, then the definition will be of
decisive importance here.
-----
>
> >synched to the planck time scale.
>
> The Planck Time scale! 10^-43 sec is about a billion billion billion
> billion times too short to be consciously noticed.
### I know - but don't ask me, I just repeat what gts says. It's his copies.
-------
>
> >You can see there is a the problem, right? If we as observers
> >wanted to accept the majority opinion of all gts-like entities
> >(in terms of physical structure, memories, and beliefs 99.9999%
> > similar to each other), the original gts would be outvoted.
>
> Huh? Who cares if observers think it's gts or not, the only
> important thing is if the copy thinks he's gts and if they remember
> being him then they will. Outvoted?
>
### At least one of the gts's will disagree about being identical to the
others (ask gts, he'll confirm it). Opinions of his copies will be
discordant.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:03 MST