Re: this very moment

From: Jacques Mallah <>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 18:24:53 -0700 (PDT)

--- Fred Chen <> wrote:
> Surely, the idea that 'you' have a somewhat
> 'predictable future' exists in a different (more
> 'meaningful') sense from its antithesis?

    Of course, you can use a practical definition, as
long as you don't confuse it with a fundamental
    To try to be more precise you can label the set of
all observer-moments with characteristics X,Y and Z as
"Fred#25". Then consider the conditional effective
probability that a "Fred#25" observer-moment, if it
exists on 5/16/2000 at 12:00 PM and sees how the
weather is, will see rain. There are other ways of
generalizing this.
    Another way to go is to consider an implementation
of a computation, extended over time, as "you". You
can't tell which implementation you are just from the
available information in an observer-moment.
Fundamentally, all predictions are unaltered because
this is just a definition. "You" are then more likely
to be an implementation that lives for many time
steps, but only in proportion to the number of steps;
the measure distribution on observer-moments (time
steps) is thus unaltered.

- - - - - - -
               Jacques Mallah (
         Physicist / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate
"I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum
         My URL:

Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
Received on Mon May 15 2000 - 18:26:54 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:07 PST