X-Message-Number: 25203 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 05:48:41 -0800 Subject: The QE, to Thomas From: <> Dear Thomas: You wrote: "When I repeated my question with changes, I was asking you to DEFINE what you meant by continuity. You base your ideas about survival of your QE on its continuity; yet nowhere do you discuss explicitly just what you mean by 'continuity'. " I never used the word continuity (it was Robert who used this word), but I have made it clear why I survive. Let me explain again. The qualia experiencer is a physical system possessing a set of (currently unknown) properties S, which form the basis of a subjective inner-life. If a physical system does not possess all of the properties in S, then it is not a qualia experiencer, which means (of course) that it cannot experience qualia. Now let P(X) be the predicate, 'The physical system X has all properties in S.' (Thus, for example, P(my brain) is true, since my brain has all the properties required for experiencing qualia.) Theorem {QE Survival}: If P(X) holds for a physical system X for every t in [T0, T1], then personal survival through this interval is guaranteed. Proof: Since personal survival is defined as survival of the qualia experiencer, and since the qualia experiencer exists for every moment in the specified interval of time (by assumption), the theorem is trivially true. Theorem {QE Destruction}: If P(X) does not hold for a physical system X for any t in [T0, T1], then personal destruction is guaranteed. Proof: Since personal destruction is defined as destruction of the qualia experiencer, and since the qualia experiencer of the physical system ceases to exist for at least one moment in time, the theorem is trivially true. I'm not sure how I can be more clear than this. I survive on a daily (and nighly) basis because my brain never stops having the properties in S. You wrote: "Take the first example I made, of someone who is destroyed and then recreated EXACTLY. Why is it that I cannot claim continuity between this person and his/her recreation?" I don't know what you mean by 'continuity'. In any case, by your own admission, the person is DESTROYED. You use a misleading word 'recreated'. You cannot 'recreate' something. You can only create a duplicate (or, even more precisely, an approximation) of something that once existed. Things possess an intrinsic identity in spacetime---if you create something that is atomically identical to something that existed at another point in spacetime, it is still a different thing. It can never be the same thing. You wrote: "On all physical and measurable factors, they are the same down to the molecules which make them up." Again, this is absurd. You can only create something that LOOKS like the same thing from the point of view of an electron microscope. But just because you have a defective tool, one that cannot spot the differences between two things, doesn't mean those thigns are one and the same thing. I am reminded of the Biblical story of Jacob and Esau. Jacob, wanting to trick his father Isaac out of Esau's birthright, wore the clothes of his brother and attached hair to himself. According to the 'instrument' of Isaac, the two people were the same. Does this mean they were the same person? Obviously not! Just because a tool is limited in what it can measure, doesn't mean that when it finds two things to be the same, with respect to the parameters it measures, that they ARE the same thing. In a similar way, an electron microscope cannot every prove two things are the same thing. For one, it can only detect differences across space---not spacetime. For another, it can only measure relatively large properties of the physical reality. Quantum mechanics assures that it cannot measure finely, for the very act of measurement induces changes in the system. This latter point means that (even neglecting spacetime (which you most certainly *cannot* neglect), it is fundamentally impossible to build an instrument that can tell you if two things are one and the same thing. So you saying that an electron microscope would find no differences between the original and the duplicate is meaningless. In fact, is is verifiably meaningless, since we can construct a duplicate while the original is still present, in which case the claim that they are the same thing is patently and obviously absurd! The fact is, you wish to believe a duplicate of you would be you, because it gives you comfort, given the relatively poor (but improving) state of cryonics today. But just because something is comforting to you, doesn't mean it is true. You wrote: "Again, I raised the possibility that we might have our QE disappear every time we slept, and awaken with a new QE (but of course all the memories etc which our brain contained when we went to sleep)." The QE is matter, made up of brain matter. In order for the QE to disappear every time we slept, it would be necessary for that brain matter to go out of existence. Do you seriously expect me to entertain the possibility that part of my brain goes out of existence every night? That whole neurons and other extra cellular constructs simply cease existing? Not only would this violate physical laws, but it has never been observed to happen in anyone else, so why should I expect it to happen with me? You are walking the boundaries of fantasy here. [snip] Best Regards, Richard B. R. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25203