Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
1–10 of 67 posts
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#2[deleted]
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#3I don't think this really disproves quantum immortality? You never experience the gun firing because in all the universes where it fires you die so quickly you can't sense it. That doesn't mean the gun never fires. It just means that you only experience it in the event it didn't. This is kind of tautologically true. By definition, if you're alive, you haven't been shot in the head at point blank range.
Particularly, assumption 2 is in no way required for the quantum immortality thought experiment to work.
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#4I've been obsessed with QI ever since I first heard about it. Every time I have a small glimpse of inattention, I always like to think that my consciousness just got transposed to another reality. Sometimes it's while I'm driving my car, and it makes it all the more trippy.
However, I'm not sure I understand the logic behind their reasoning.
> Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest.
> you should always experience the reality in which the doctor tells you about your unknown ailment.
If you experience the reality in which you live the longest, wouldn't the ailment just never come about?
Going back to the gun and bullet example, your consciousness being transposed to the branch where none of that even happens, wouldn't the same thing apply to any disease that would develop within your body? You would just get transposed to the reality in which no such disease develop, extending your life even further.
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#5I've been obsessed with QI ever since I first heard about it. Every time I have a small glimpse of inattention, I always like to think that my consciousness just got transposed to another reality. Sometimes it's while I'm driving my car, and it makes it all the more trippy. However, I'm not sure I understand the logic behind their reasoning. > Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. > you…
>Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest.
That formulation doesn't make sense to me. I would say it as "Consciousness can only experience realities in which it exists." Therefore you won't move into futures in which you don't exist.
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#6I 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.
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#7I've been obsessed with QI ever since I first heard about it. Every time I have a small glimpse of inattention, I always like to think that my consciousness just got transposed to another reality. Sometimes it's while I'm driving my car, and it makes it all the more trippy. However, I'm not sure I understand the logic behind their reasoning. > Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. > you…
>Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. That formulation doesn't make sense to me. I would say it as "Consciousness can only experience realities in which it exists." Therefore you won't move into futures in which you don't exist.
My reasoning behind this was that there can be multiple futures where you could exist and experience, but some of them shorter than others. E.g.
A------B
\ --------C
If you are travelling towards B, once you reach it, you die. But you can't magically jump last second to parallel reality C, you can only branch from the present. Thus you would have needed to branch down to C in advance. Thanks for pointing this out, I will make my reasoning more clear in a future edit.
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. That formulation doesn't make sense to me. I would say it as "Consciousness can only experience realities in which it exists." Therefore you won't move into futures in which you don't exist.
My reasoning behind this was that there can be multiple futures where you could exist and experience, but some of them shorter than others. E.g. A------B \ --------C If you are travelling towards B, once you reach it, you die. But you can't magically jump last second to parallel reality C, you can only branch from the present. Thus you would have needed to branch down to C in advance. Thanks for pointing this out, I…
That's what I understood based on the gun example. However the same would hold true for any deadly disease you develop, wouldn't it?
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
My reasoning behind this was that there can be multiple futures where you could exist and experience, but some of them shorter than others. E.g. A------B \ --------C If you are travelling towards B, once you reach it, you die. But you can't magically jump last second to parallel reality C, you can only branch from the present. Thus you would have needed to branch down to C in advance. Thanks for pointing this out, I…
That's what I understood based on the gun example. However the same would hold true for any deadly disease you develop, wouldn't it?
True, the doctor example is really just supposed to be segue into thinking about how a direct message could work. Although, perhaps facing death and recovering turns you into the kind of fellow who will live their life in a vastly different way leading to a longer life?
Re: Disprove quantum immortality without risking your life (2019)
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Consciousness experiences the reality in which it lives the longest. That formulation doesn't make sense to me. I would say it as "Consciousness can only experience realities in which it exists." Therefore you won't move into futures in which you don't exist.
My reasoning behind this was that there can be multiple futures where you could exist and experience, but some of them shorter than others. E.g. A------B \ --------C If you are travelling towards B, once you reach it, you die. But you can't magically jump last second to parallel reality C, you can only branch from the present. Thus you would have needed to branch down to C in advance. Thanks for pointing this out, I…
Two points:
1. Delayed choice quantum eraser experiments suggest to me, unless I've misunderstood them (which is highly possible), that effects can affect causes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_erase...
2. Getting shot in the head isn't always fatal. The bullet could deflect off your skull, or even go through your brain and just not hit you. The bullet could experience spontaneous existence failure, or simply fail to interact with the matter in your body and pass through you. My limited understanding of physics says that things like these are possible but massively unlikely at large scale. However, if some set of things are possible but rare, and the only alternative things are impossible, then something rare will happen.