On 12 Feb 2009, at 14:30, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> 2009/2/12 Johnathan Corgan <
jcorgan@...>:
>
>> It is an open question (to me at least) whether there are any
>> observer
>> moments without successors, i.e., where the amplitude of the SW
>> goes to
>> zero. If it does not, then this implies that the always branching
>> tree
>> of observer moments has no leaf nodes--rather, it becomes an ever
>> finer
>> filigree of lines, but any particular point will always have a
>> downstream set of forks. This is the essence of the no cul-de-sac
>> conjecture, and the crux of the quantum theory of immortality.
>
> Does MWI suggest that everything that can occur does occur? The
> following article suggests not:
>
>
http://scienceblogs.com/pontiff/2008/11/everything_and_nothing.phpOK. Even in MWI, proving that 0 = 1 remains plausibly impossible.
Of course believing that someone did proved that 0 = 1 remains quite
possible.
>
>
> I guess it is still possible that the no cul-de-sac conjecture is
> correct even though some ways of avoiding death are impossible.
Just try avoid death by squaring a circle :)
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
