Re: many worlds theory of immortality

From: Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:16:48 +0200

Le 10-mai-05, à 12:25, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :

>
>> I should add that I don't believe in QTI, I don't believe that we are
>> guaranteed to experience such outcomes. I prefer the observer-moment
>> concept in which we are more likely to experience observer-moments
>> where
>> we are young and living within a normal lifespan than ones where we
>> are
>> at a very advanced age due to miraculous luck.
>
> Aren't the above two sentences contradictory? If it is guaranteed that
> somewhere in the multiverse there will be a million year old Hal
> observer-moment, doesn't that mean that you are guaranteed to
> experience life as a million year old?

With some ASSA perhaps, but with the RSSA it makes sense only if those
"old Hal OM." have the right relative proportion to the young one.
where:
SSA self-sampling assumption (by Nick Bolstrom)
ASSA idem but conceived as absolute
RSSA idem but conceived as relative
OM = Observer Moment

Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
Received on Tue May 10 2005 - 10:27:18 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:10 PST