- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Russell Standish <R.Standish.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:37:33 +1100 (EST)

*>
*

*>
*

*> I am rewriting my reply to the previous post in this thread
*

*> because the one I sent last Friday for some reason did not get
*

*> distributed to the list, and I didn't save a copy.
*

*>
*

*> From: Russell Standish
*

*> >> In any case it is always true that some way of calculating the
*

*> >> measure distribution is needed. Your claim was that the RSSA is needed.
*

*> >> My example shows that RM does the job.
*

*> >
*

*> > My understanding is that ASSA cannot assign a probability to p(Y1|X)
*

*> > or p(Y2|Z).
*

*>
*

*> Your 'understanding' is wrong. (Of course, I mean 'effective
*

*> probability' here.)
*

*> Given the measure distribution of observation-moments, as a
*

*> function on observables (such as Y1 and X),
*

*> p(Y1|X) = p(Y1 and X) / p(X)
*

*> Not so hard, was it?
*

*> [Note that here X was the observation of being Jack Mallah, and
*

*> Y1 was basically the observation of being old. See previous posts on
*

*> this thread if you want exact details of Y1; nothing else about it is
*

*> relevent here I think.]
*

ASSA doesn't give p(Y1 and X) either. The only way I know of calculating p(Y1

and X) is via the Bayes formula p(Y1 and X) = p(Y1|X)p(X)

*>
*

*> > The real problem, and I have long pointed this out, is that absolute
*

*> > measure is completely irrelevant to what one observes about
*

*> > oneself. QTI is the assumption that p(Y1|X)=p(Y2|Z)=1, under
*

*> > appropriate definitions of what X and Z mean.
*

*>
*

*> Huh? Why should p(not Y1, and X) = 0 ? Especially since my
*

*> current observations are (not Y1, and X)!!!
*

*>
*

Your current observations are p(Y3|X), where Y3 = Jacques Mallah's is

observed to be young. Y3 is not equivalent to (not Y1). Just because

you see yourself young does not preclude seeing yourself old at a

later date!

*> > I don't think your measure argument is wrong, or that ASSA is wrong,
*

*> > its just that it doesn't disprove QTI. I don't adhere to QTI as an
*

*> > article of faith, however, it seems more likely to be the truth than
*

*> > not. If someone can come up with a good counter-argument to QTI, then
*

*> > of course I'll modify my beliefs. I have tried to falsify QTI, but not
*

*> > succeeded so far.
*

*>
*

*> That's BS. I have presented arguments that demolish the QTI such
*

*> as the measure argument and Occam's razor. QTI believers seem to take it
*

I forgotten your Occam's razor argument. Where is it in the thread

archive? As stated before, your measure argument is so full of holes,

one can drive a freight train through it.

*> on faith to me; they have presented no arguments to support their case, as
*

*> far as I can tell, that make any sense. If you understood the measure
*

*> argument, you would see, as I explained in my last post "Re: On begin very
*

*> old" and in other posts, that it rules out any type of immortality.
*

*>
*

*> - - - - - - -
*

*> Jacques Mallah (jqm1584.domain.name.hidden)
*

*> Graduate Student / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate
*

*> "I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum
*

*> My URL: http://pages.nyu.edu/~jqm1584/
*

*>
*

*>
*

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Russell Standish Director

High Performance Computing Support Unit,

University of NSW Phone 9385 6967

Sydney 2052 Fax 9385 6965

Australia R.Standish.domain.name.hidden

Room 2075, Red Centre http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Sun Nov 14 1999 - 14:40:07 PST

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:37:33 +1100 (EST)

ASSA doesn't give p(Y1 and X) either. The only way I know of calculating p(Y1

and X) is via the Bayes formula p(Y1 and X) = p(Y1|X)p(X)

Your current observations are p(Y3|X), where Y3 = Jacques Mallah's is

observed to be young. Y3 is not equivalent to (not Y1). Just because

you see yourself young does not preclude seeing yourself old at a

later date!

I forgotten your Occam's razor argument. Where is it in the thread

archive? As stated before, your measure argument is so full of holes,

one can drive a freight train through it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Russell Standish Director

High Performance Computing Support Unit,

University of NSW Phone 9385 6967

Sydney 2052 Fax 9385 6965

Australia R.Standish.domain.name.hidden

Room 2075, Red Centre http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Sun Nov 14 1999 - 14:40:07 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST
*