Re: Transporter Paradox

From: James Higgo <j.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 21:00:33 -0000

Have you tried reading Tegmark's paper? It's simpler if everything exists. I
am happy trying to explain what exists, not what I speculate may exist. Have
fun, though, Brent.
----- Original Message -----
From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
To: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: Transporter Paradox


> On 17-Mar-01, James Higgo wrote:
> > Bravo, George. This is a derivation of Liebnitz's point.
> >
> > How many more ingenious 'solutions' will there be to the paradoxes
> > that belief in a 'first person' leads to? Quite a few I imagine, as
> > nobody can countenance for a split-second that they don't exist as a
> > 'person'. They absolutely insist on assuming a whole world of
> > remembered experience of which they have no direct knowledge. It seems
> > we are hard-wired not to hear the question, not to allow ourselves to
> > doubt our souls for a moment.
>
> Of course we are hard-wired to perceive the passage of time,
> three-dimensional space, and the pleasure of sex. Physics and Darwin
> provide explanations of this. What's your explanation?...oh, never
> mind, I know..."It just is."
>
> Brent Meeker
>
>
Received on Sun Mar 18 2001 - 13:23:55 PST