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