> > You eliminate past/objective WRs. You still don't eliminate
> > futur/subjective WRs. You eliminate 3-WR, not 1-WR.
> >
> > Of course you are denying the distinction between first and
> > third person. So I guess you are vaccinated to the conclusion of UDA.
>
> I deny that such a distinction exists for me to be able to deny :-)
>
>
> - - - - - - -
> Jacques Mallah (jqm1584.domain.name.hidden)
> Physicist / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate
> "I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum
> My URL: http://pages.nyu.edu/~jqm1584/
>
>
I agree with Jacques Mallah here, although undoubtedly for different
reasons :). Assuming a plenitude (eg Schmidhuber's or whatever), then
SASes will select a particular element of that plenitude. In my Occam
paper, I make the argument that this element should with greatest
measure (or liklihood in other words) be the Deutsch/Everett
Multiverse. Then the computational indeterminancy experienced in the
1st person is just the quantum 1-indeterminancy of the MWI. This is a
direct consequence of my "Projection" postulate of consciousness. The
Multiverse itself has no white rabbits of either the 1st or 3rd person
kind. All white rabbits are banished to extremely rare portions of the
plenitude.
Cheers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Thu Feb 17 2000 - 15:55:05 PST