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

From: George Levy <glevy.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:20:15 -0700

Hi Bruno

As a variation of my last post, I would like to use your teleportation

experiment rather than Q-suicide to illustrate the First and Third

Person concept, in a manner that parallels Einstein's scenario in which

two observers in different inertial frames of reference observe that the

length of an object is a relative quantity.

Let's consider a teleportation/duplication experiment in which 100

copies of a volunteer are sent.from Brussel to Washington and to Moscow.

Let's say that A copies are send to Washington and 100-A copies are sent

to Moscow where 0<A<100. In addition let us say that the value of A is a

random process generated by the multiple throw of a dice for example,

and is uniformly distributed between 0 and 100.

The expected value of A for a Third Person observer would be exactly 50

since A is uniformly distributed. However, the expected value of A for a

First Person who ends up in Washington is >50 and for a First Person who

ends up in Moscow is <50.

The actual expected value of A for the First Person going to Washington

is 67 and for the one going to Moscow is 33.

This can be calculated by assuming for example 100 such experiments with

A uniformly distributed such that A takes on a different value for each

experiment such as A = 1,2,3,4,5,...100. The value of A as seen by the

First Person in Washington is a weighted sum of the value of A

multiplied by the number of observers, and normalized by the total

number of observers in the 100 experiments:

(100x100 + 99x99 + 98x98....2x2 + 1x1) / ( (100x(100+1)/2)

= ((100)(100+1)(2x100+1)/6) / ( (100x(100+1)/2) = 67

Similarly for the one in Moscow.

We see here that the expected value of A is relative to the observers in

Washington or Moscow and the frame of reference is defined by the

contigency that A imposes on their destination Washington/Moscow.

George

PS. I just saw the title of Stephen's post, and I assume it implies

trouble for duplication experiments in general... Anyways I am sending

this post. :-)

Received on Tue Jun 15 2004 - 04:52:47 PDT

Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:20:15 -0700

Hi Bruno

As a variation of my last post, I would like to use your teleportation

experiment rather than Q-suicide to illustrate the First and Third

Person concept, in a manner that parallels Einstein's scenario in which

two observers in different inertial frames of reference observe that the

length of an object is a relative quantity.

Let's consider a teleportation/duplication experiment in which 100

copies of a volunteer are sent.from Brussel to Washington and to Moscow.

Let's say that A copies are send to Washington and 100-A copies are sent

to Moscow where 0<A<100. In addition let us say that the value of A is a

random process generated by the multiple throw of a dice for example,

and is uniformly distributed between 0 and 100.

The expected value of A for a Third Person observer would be exactly 50

since A is uniformly distributed. However, the expected value of A for a

First Person who ends up in Washington is >50 and for a First Person who

ends up in Moscow is <50.

The actual expected value of A for the First Person going to Washington

is 67 and for the one going to Moscow is 33.

This can be calculated by assuming for example 100 such experiments with

A uniformly distributed such that A takes on a different value for each

experiment such as A = 1,2,3,4,5,...100. The value of A as seen by the

First Person in Washington is a weighted sum of the value of A

multiplied by the number of observers, and normalized by the total

number of observers in the 100 experiments:

(100x100 + 99x99 + 98x98....2x2 + 1x1) / ( (100x(100+1)/2)

= ((100)(100+1)(2x100+1)/6) / ( (100x(100+1)/2) = 67

Similarly for the one in Moscow.

We see here that the expected value of A is relative to the observers in

Washington or Moscow and the frame of reference is defined by the

contigency that A imposes on their destination Washington/Moscow.

George

PS. I just saw the title of Stephen's post, and I assume it implies

trouble for duplication experiments in general... Anyways I am sending

this post. :-)

Received on Tue Jun 15 2004 - 04:52:47 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST
*