Re: Q Wars Episode 10^9: the Phantom Measure

From: Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue Jun 1 03:47:39 1999

George Levy wrote:

>I suspect that the opinion of a decreasing measure is due to the impression
>that entropic effect will generate many more worlds that are inauspicious to
>life than worlds that are. In other words, random quantum effects will, on
>the average, increase the amount of disorder. Here I am putting words
>(ideas)
>into people mouths (head). However, I think that this opinion that measure
>has a tendency to decrease is erroneous for the following two reasons.
>
>1) While it is possible that the *now* branches into the future and into
>mostly inauspicious worlds, it is also possible that the *now* is reached
>from several past worlds, most of which would be inauspicious. Perfect
>symmetry between the future and the past hints to an equal number of
>branching into the future and *rejoining* from the past. New conscious
>identities could arise from inauspicious worlds as a counterbalance to the
>loss of identities to those worlds. The MW is not like a giant tree but more
>like a giant net. This view complicates the task of of tracking identity.
>Not
>only we have to explain how identity multiplies in the branching process but
>we must also explain how several identities merge in the rejoining process.
>Personally, I see no problem with the MW=net since I view the perception of
>identity as the *limited* perception of the self from a SINGLE POINT of the
>MW net, the *here and now*.

I agree. That is why I consider that the measure is relative or
conditional.
About the fusing of branches, it is linked, I guess, with
first person undistinguishability.

>2) The second reason is that if we conceive of both the MW and the measure
>as
>uncountable infinite quantities, then the whole idea of measure "decreases"
>must be qualified. Any finite trimming in the branching process(say due to
>suicide) will be insufficient to make any dent in the size of the measure
>and
>consciousness will continue. To really affect the measure, the suicide would
>have to be done with an infinitely reliable machine, capable of operation
>throughout all branches stemming from the *now*. Such a machine, I believe
>would be impossible to build even in principle (for the reason that the MW
>is
>big enough to include worlds that do not include the machine). The big
>question is what kind of infinite are the MW and the measure of the self.
>Are
>they countable or uncountable? How can the nitty gritty of physical science
>(i.e., Heisenberg constant = h) bridge to the philosophical vagueness of
>the
>MW (i.e Heisenberg constant = anything).

I think you make a point. The net aspect (and the fusing phenomenon)
could
force us to take possible uncountable set of "past" histories into
account.
About the constants, I guess some are necessary (and thus derivable
according to comp), and some could be kind of random oracle. I don't know.

>PS. Bruno, I started reading your thesis. It is impressive. My knowledge of
>French is definitely an advantage in understanding it.

Thank you for telling me that :-)

Bruno.
Received on Tue Jun 01 1999 - 03:47:39 PDT