Live data from Hacker News

Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

vankessel.io

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#11
This is a really nice argument and I hope that Kevin and others continue to pursue it. However, I think there is a subtle flaw in the presented argument that is parallel to issues illuminated by Goedel's incompleteness theorem. The problem, I believe, is with the assertion:

> 1. The many-worlds interpretation is true.

> 2. Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest.

> If all the previous assumptions are true, then at least one of these two must be false.

Both of these statements can be simultaneously true if we allow for a third possibility that is logically consistent with the entire argument:

3. Having near logical certainty and awareness that quantum immortality is true is fundamentally incompatible with living on the subjective immortal multiverse timeline.

This would actually be a robust assumption to have explicitly included at the start, as it also makes intuitive sense. Afterall, if you absolutely knew that quantum immortality was true, then you could (and likely would) walk around taking obviously foolish risks without ever experiencing any consequences. Such a universe would basically lack a coherent sense of cause-and-effect from your subjective point of view. And if it was a universe where cause-and-effect don't hold for you, then how could you have logical certainty about anything?

This means that if quantum immortality is true, you can never have logical certainty of its truth.

This is very similar to how Goedel's incompleteness requires that there be true statements that can't be proven as true because the existence of an explicit proof would negate the statement itself, breaken the consistency of the system of logic (and, hence, making it incomplete by necessity).

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#12
post #11

This is a really nice argument and I hope that Kevin and others continue to pursue it. However, I think there is a subtle flaw in the presented argument that is parallel to issues illuminated by Goedel's incompleteness theorem. The problem, I believe, is with the assertion: > 1. The many-worlds interpretation is true. > 2. Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. > If all the previous assu…

> if you absolutely knew that quantum immortality was true, then you could (and likely would) walk around taking obviously foolish risks without ever experiencing any consequences.

What if you get put on a path where you eventually die because of your recklessness, and that was the longest you would have stayed alive? Basically you already exhausted all possible paths but this one.

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#13
I like the idea that we're all immortal from our own perspective. I don't think this article contradicts it.

>Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest: Under this assumption we can change the circumstances from a punishment to a reward. Instead of a gun, imagine a doctor has information about your health. If he tells you about it and you act on the information, you will certainly live a longer life. The doctor will only tell you about the information based the result of the quantum event. If the current assumptions are true, then you should always experience the reality in which the doctor tells you about your unknown ailment.

No I think this misunderstands the issue. Consciousness experiences the reality in which it exists. There are two types of 'timelines', if you like: those where your consciousness ends, and those where it doesn't. The only one you can possibly be in is the one where it doesn't. You can't 'extend' your life with QI. You won't live a longer life, you'll always life forever.

It's not quantum longeivity. It's quantum immortality. If the button you were clicking killed you on a random bit being 1 and not on the bit being 0, then you would survive clicking it.

OR, you would just not click on it. Because there're worlds where you click it, and worlds where you don't.

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#14
>2. Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest.

This seems like a very strong version of the quantum immortality idea. I was under the impression that quantum immortality didn't suggest that there was only one path among the splitting universes where someone is "truly" conscious and experiencing reality.

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#16
I believe I experienced a quantum immortality event. I went all the way through through the tunnel of white light in the hospital while being treated for a head trauma.

The process of entering “the tunnel” was that of shedding the ego. Only when naked could the journey begin. When I had totally accepted my death and it’s ramifications upon others.

My memory of death is one of unimaginable peace and serenity. Like being white light. Although it happened 10 years ago it’s hard being back alive really as every moment is suffering in comparison.

When I was shoved back down into my body things seemed the same but later two of my close friends sat me down and told me I was treating them differently. I relate to almost all Mandela effects and have some strange memories my family deny.

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#17

I think assumption 4 is in error. >There exists a message in the encoding that can extend one's life. If quantum immortality holds then there is no message which will extend your life because you're already immortal.

But there must be a mechanism for the immortality shouldn't there be? Let's go back to the gun example quickly. (assuming a perfect gun, no misfires, or lucky non-fatal shots)

If quantum immortality holds and the experiment is run 8 times, you should see the sequence 00000000 right? This is a message too, because it deviates from expectation to shovel you down a reality you can experience. Sort of like Zipf's law where the less likely the result the more information it contains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf%27s_law#Applications

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#18
post #11

This is a really nice argument and I hope that Kevin and others continue to pursue it. However, I think there is a subtle flaw in the presented argument that is parallel to issues illuminated by Goedel's incompleteness theorem. The problem, I believe, is with the assertion: > 1. The many-worlds interpretation is true. > 2. Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. > If all the previous assu…

Thank you. I really like the point you are making, but I am unsure about a lack of cause and effect. When I think of cause and effect, I think of it as taking the state of the universe from state t+0 to t+1 using the laws of physics. All of it being deterministic, except for quantum mechanics. This indeterminism in QM creating the branches allowing one to escape death.

Couldn't believing in quantum immortality be compatible with this? You could do things like firing a gun to your head, and it would misfire every time. You could jump off a building and would land in a passing open-topped garbage truck full of soft material. You'd experience all sorts of crazy coincidences, but all of them plausibly deniable and within the framework of cause and effect as we know it.

With that said, I feel like what you are saying is true but can not fully formulate my thoughts on it yet. I agree completely that you can never have logical certainty of it's truth, but I'm not certain it's contingent on it being true. Perhaps we should instead say that QI is either true or false, but we can never prove which? This removes the implication but still makes sense in the context of Godel's first incompleteness theorem.

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#19
First, obligatory short story (free open access on the site below) for this entire concept. It takes things to their extreme conclusion and I liked it very much with the way it experiments with QI: https://www.tor.com/2010/08/05/divided-by-infinity/

This brings me to my second point: in relation to the death of a close family member a couple years ago from cancer. The end lasted a month and largely consisted in its last days of a slow withering of conscious reasoning and awareness. How exactly would something like that square with the notion of consciousness suddenly jumping to the QI state in which it simply "persists"? An argument around this was already made by Max Tegmark, who suggested that the flaw in that reasoning is that dying is not a binary event. Instead it is very often a progressive degeneration, with a continuum of states of steadily decreasing consciousness. In other words, in most real causes of death (and this squares with my experience), one experiences such a gradual loss of self-awareness that an observer defies all odds only within the confines of a very abstract scenario.

Furthermore, the obvious: QI does not at all save us from the loss of loved ones who do die in our quantum branch. Even if it were true, and each individual continues to perceive consciousness in a sort of immortal state of constantly branching awareness, we objectively know that we see these people die forever in our perception, with no allowance that I know of for a reunion in the future. Thus, its ultimate outcome if you follow this logic is deeply tragic: We keep living, seeing those we love die to our perception, while these same loved ones go through the same process, even if in some other branch other versions of both get to see said loved ones continue to live for a certain time longer.

Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)

#20
post #11

This is a really nice argument and I hope that Kevin and others continue to pursue it. However, I think there is a subtle flaw in the presented argument that is parallel to issues illuminated by Goedel's incompleteness theorem. The problem, I believe, is with the assertion: > 1. The many-worlds interpretation is true. > 2. Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. > If all the previous assu…

If quantum immortality is true, and I, knowing that, step in front of a car, how is it going to prevent my bones from breaking?

I remember a haunting fantasy short story about a boy in a small town who accidentally meets and becomes friends with the man who digs all of the graves. Eventually he notices that somehow, the gravedigger knows when a grave is needed before a person dies, but won't say how or who. Often it is possible to guess though. One day, he's told that he'll never guess who the next grave is for, and indeed, he can't. So that night he finds out his parents have been in an auto accident, and therefore one of them is presumably going to die...and so he goes back and kills the gravedigger and buries him in the grave that was intended for one of his parents.

The rest of the story is that once the gravedigger is dead, people in the town stop dying...but that is not a good thing - first his mother is paralyzed, then she has a stroke, then there is a fire... And the end is that the murderer becomes the new gravedigger to restore normality and now old, he hopes for someone to relieve him of the job.

Post reply on HN