From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 09:13:18 MST
Lee Corbin wrote:
>> I was speaking hypothetically. If we had a way to
>> monitor the subject's experience as he walks through
>> the chamber in real time, we would monitor his
>> experience of walking out of one door only. He would
>> not experience himself to walk out of both doors.
>
> By what black art would our means to monitor the
> subject's experience pick one of the two and not
> the other? Would it flip a coin?
I was merely trying to illustrate a point by speaking hypothetically.
Forget "monitoring" if it causes confusion -- instead imagine yourself
as the single Subject-0 who enters the chamber. You will experience
yourself to leave by one exit, not two, and your exit will be distinct
(labeled either "A" or "B"). Nothing remarkable about that to you, I
hope.
> I hope that you are not deliberately misunderstanding me.
> If you *ask* each duplicate, as they exit the room, no
> one of them will say "I walked out of both doors",
> because it will be obvious from the context of the
> question that reference is being made to the short-
> term memory of having passed through a doorway.
Right.
> On the other hand, if the original person *were* philo-
> sophically at level seven, and wondered if that was
> what you were getting at, of course he would reply,
> "Yes, I walked out of both doors, because in the most
> important senses my duplicate and I are the same person."
I'm not talking about your level seven, which as you know is a
completely irrational position to me. If anything this duplication
chamber can help you understand why I believe so.
>> One thing that should be made clear however: in the
>> chamber the two duplicates at their moment of creation
>> immediately go on to experience different realities
>> (different exit doors) and are thus slightly different
>> even if only in very subtle ways.
>
> That's true of duplicates, too.
But you've also stated words to the effect that "what is true for one of
them must also be true for the other [under level 7]" That statement is
false if you accept my paragraph above.
The two continuations will go on to live separate lives. Their
experiences of life will be entirely different and their personalities
will diverge. The life-experience of A will not be true for B, beginning
from the very first moment of their mutual existence. What can be more
important determinants of their identities than their personalities and
experiences of life?
> shall we keep quantum mechanics out
> of it for the sake of simplicity?
Why? The chamber is built on the principle that alternate continuations
of oneself are created by the multiverse with each measurement. The
measurement of the exit door is merely an easily visualized proxy for an
experiment such as a photon polarization measurement performed by a
physicist.
> The duplication
> chamber is simple: you go in, and a copy is made of
> you, atom for atom. Or, since you are at a high
> enough level of identity, one is teleported-in-place,
> using different atoms, at the same time that one's
> duplicate is made. Again, is this all right with
> you?
I must say first of all that I resent (mildly) your implication that any
level in your seven-item list is "higher" than any other level. The
construction of your hierarchy appears to be designed to lead people to
think level seven is a goal they should aspire to, as if level seven
were the ultimate level of understanding that only an elite few have
attained.
I think a better title for your list would be "Seven opinions about
identity, few of which make much sense, depending on who you talk to."
But back to your question: I'm reluctant to let you alter the chamber in
any way. I also wonder why you feel it's necessary to do so. But go
ahead and think of the chamber as you describe above; I will point out
if and when you are not true to the original concept.
> Yes, while today you expect to survive *sleeping*
> tonight, you rightly expect the helicopter to have
> a significant chance of killing you. You also, (I
> think wrongly), fear that the 1000-way duplication
> chamber will have a .999 chance of killing you.
>
> Is all of the foregoing correct? Thanks for your
> patience, but we must avoid misunderstanding.
Yes. Your chamber will kill 999 of my 1000 alternate continuations.
These are not very good odds for me, given that I don't presume to have
any control over which alternate universe I will experience. The
universe in which I find myself will be determined entirely by random
chance, as per the MW interpretation of QM.
This is exactly the case also for any particle physicist who conducts an
experiment, e.g., if polarization of the photon is measured "up" then a
device triggers his death. If it is measured as "down" then he survives.
His probability of surviving such an experiment is .50.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:08 MST