Re: ASSA and Many-Worlds

From: Russell Standish <>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:06:58 +1100

On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 04:42:48AM -0000, Jason wrote:
> I agree that regardless of the creation or destruction of other
> copies, there is no reason for there ever to be any effect on first
> person experience, that means no funny feelings, no loss of
> consciousness, etc.
> RSSA Proponents:
> Many-worlds implies there are always branched histories where an
> observer survives to experience another observer-moment.
> ASSA Proponents:
> Observer-moments that find themselves as extremely and abnormally long-
> lived observers should be exceedingly rare.
> I fail to see how the above descriptions are mutually exclusive. I

These are not characterisation of the ASSA and RSSA. The one you label
RSSA is known as the "No cul-de-sac assumption". The one you label as ASSA
is a consequence of the ASSA, and some relatively minimal assumptions
on measure.

> The reason I started this thread was to discuss the possibility that
> Many-Worlds is a property of this universe for purely ASSA reasons, I
> see no reason for it to exist for any anthropic reasons, but due to
> the exponential growth in observer moments defined by many-world
> universes, it makes great sense.
> Jason

Occams razor would favour Multiverses for Anthropic Reasons.

I never really understood your point about the ASSA, as the relevant
*SSA for understanding what world we live in is the original SSA
(birth moment sampling) which both the ASSA and the RSSA satisfy.


A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052         
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Sun Jan 28 2007 - 18:44:52 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:13 PST