Quantum immortality

[Jessica5]

You better hope this isn't true, more than any other scientific idea out there isn't true. This is by far the most utterly horrific idea of all time.

It's an extension of the many worlds interpretation. It holds that since there will always be an infitesemal probability you'll survive anything, you're immortal. Sure, you'll die in a vast majority of universes, but you can only really experience the universes where you constantly survive.

In 30,000 years, you'll still be alive.

 

[Isadeth]

In 30,000 years, you'll still be alive.

Greattt. One more thing to overthink about Haha

 

[Superdeterminist]

Scary if true. The good news is that we seem to be making progress, slowly but surely, towards the best of all possible worlds. We're still so far away, but we might just make it.

 

[woxihuanni]

Whenever see any quantum-sauced metaphysical crap, I just give it a wide berth.

 

[CarbonMonoxide]

Scary if true. The good news is that we seem to be making progress, slowly but surely, towards the best of all possible worlds. We're still so far away, but we might just make it.

I share this mentality that eventually humanity will experience life without all this pain and suffering. Baby steps though.

 

[FreddieQuell]

Interesting theory. Just quoting Wikipedia for completeness:

Max Tegmark now believes that from their own point of view, the person in the thought experiment should not expect immortality. Since they die in some worlds, they afterwards exist in much fewer worlds than they had before. People are less likely to find themselves in a world where their own existence is less likely. Therefore, it is only a possibility, not a certainty, that the person who does the experiment then goes on to feel like they survived.[3] This same problem, of not existing as much afterwards, was pointed out by Lev Vaidman in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.[4]

Physicist David Deutsch, though in favor of the many-worlds interpretation, states regarding quantum suicide that it would not work under the normal probability rules of quantum mechanics. Instead, one would need to add an additional assumption of ignoring worlds where the experimenter is not there. He believes that assumption is false.[5] Physicist David Wallace argues that a decision theory analysis shows that a person who prefers certain life to certain death must prefer to keep themselves alive in worlds that are more likely outcomes, not just in less likely ones.[2]

Physicist Sean M. Carroll, though also in favor of the many-worlds interpretation, states about quantum suicide that neither experiences nor rewards should be thought of as being shared between future versions of oneself, because these future versions become distinct persons when the world splits. He then states that a person cannot pick out some future versions of oneself as really being oneself and not the others. He concludes that quantum suicide kills some of these future selves, which is a bad thing the same as if there were no other worlds.

 

[agentgeez]

Interesting theory. Just quoting Wikipedia for completeness:

Max Tegmark now believes that from their own point of view, the person in the thought experiment should not expect immortality. Since they die in some worlds, they afterwards exist in much fewer worlds than they had before. People are less likely to find themselves in a world where their own existence is less likely. Therefore, it is only a possibility, not a certainty, that the person who does the experiment then goes on to feel like they survived.[3] This same problem, of not existing as much afterwards, was pointed out by Lev Vaidman in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.[4]

Physicist David Deutsch, though in favor of the many-worlds interpretation, states regarding quantum suicide that it would not work under the normal probability rules of quantum mechanics. Instead, one would need to add an additional assumption of ignoring worlds where the experimenter is not there. He believes that assumption is false.[5] Physicist David Wallace argues that a decision theory analysis shows that a person who prefers certain life to certain death must prefer to keep themselves alive in worlds that are more likely outcomes, not just in less likely ones.[2]

Physicist Sean M. Carroll, though also in favor of the many-worlds interpretation, states about quantum suicide that neither experiences nor rewards should be thought of as being shared between future versions of oneself, because these future versions become distinct persons when the world splits. He then states that a person cannot pick out some future versions of oneself as really being oneself and not the others. He concludes that quantum suicide kills some of these future selves, which is a bad thing the same as if there were no other worlds.

I have some questions about this topic. I understood the idea to be that consciousness will only ever follow the 'path' (this path being a universe with a specific series of events) in which you never die. As such, you perceive the world linearly as usual, because any event that would lead to your death with certainty wouldn't happen for you. So these quotes confuse me a little. How does it affect someone if they exist in less worlds? Why do we need to ignore worlds where the experimenter doesn't exist; why does that matter in the first place? How is it only a possibility that the person who does the experiment feels like they survived; if they're conscious, shouldn't they always be in the world where they live? I can see them dying in our world for example, but then their consciousness would just shift/always exist in a world where they didn't die. I don't see how other versions of themselves dying affects the conscious self, just like how other people dying doesn't affect my existence because I don't live from their perspective. Not like I have much quantum physics knowledge haha, I'm just wondering about this.

 

[autumnal]

You better hope this isn't true, more than any other scientific idea out there isn't true. This is by far the most utterly horrific idea of all time.

It's an extension of the many worlds interpretation. It holds that since there will always be an infitesemal probability you'll survive anything, you're immortal. Sure, you'll die in a vast majority of universes, but you can only really experience the universes where you constantly survive.

In 30,000 years, you'll still be alive.

I'm no physicist, but wouldn't this current version of us in this current universe only ever experience our own existence? Even if there were an infinite number of other versions of us in other universes, surely 'we' aren't experiencing 'their' experiences any more than we are experiencing the experiences of any other random person in our own universe? It's a bit like saying to someone 'Aha, I have created a clone of you and am going to torture it!', to which you might reply 'So? Doesn't hurt me though'.

 

[Deleted member 17949]

I doubt this is a thing tbh. Not everything is determined by probability. Things are determined by surrounding and internal conditions, so it's not like the universe flips a coin to decide the outcome of everything.

 

[rhiino]

What about the people that killed themselves in this "world" then? They are dead, they don't experience anything.

 

[Jessica5]

I'm no physicist, but wouldn't this current version of us in this current universe only ever experience our own existence? Even if there were an infinite number of other versions of us in other universes, surely 'we' aren't experiencing 'their' experiences any more than we are experiencing the experiences of any other random person in our own universe? It's a bit like saying to someone 'Aha, I have created a clone of you and am going to torture it!', to which you might reply 'So? Doesn't hurt me though'.

The multiverse theory says that you'll have infinite existences-some that you've already split from and some that you've yet to split from. There's no law of science that a person ever has to die-the odds just become basically inevitable that something will kill you at some point. Therefore, there would inevitably be some universes where you completely defy the odds and absolutely nothing ever kills you. You could be in a situation that's 99.99% deadly, but what you'll end up experiencing is the 0.01% of universes where you somehow survive the event.

What about the people that killed themselves in this "world" then? They are dead, they don't experience anything.

Sure, there would be some worlds whether the person successfully killed themselves. However, what that person would experience is the universes where they either survived their attempt, or decided against their attempt. People who have successfully killed themselves in this world aren't experiencing this world. However, they are experiencing some other world where they're still alive.

Under this theory, you'd be capable of seeing the deaths of literally everybody in the universe except for yourself.

It's a very disturbing theory.

 

[autumnal]

The multiverse theory says that you'll have infinite existences-some that you've already split from and some that you've yet to split from. There's no law of science that a person ever has to die-the odds just become basically inevitable that something will kill you at some point. Therefore, there would inevitably be some universes where you completely defy the odds and absolutely nothing ever kills you. You could be in a situation that's 99.99% deadly, but what you'll end up experiencing is the 0.01% of universes where you somehow survive the event.

Yes, but I don't think that response actually addresses my question...?

I'm no physicist, but wouldn't this current version of us in this current universe only ever experience our own existence? Even if there were an infinite number of other versions of us in other universes, surely 'we' aren't experiencing 'their' experiences any more than we are experiencing the experiences of any other random person in our own universe? It's a bit like saying to someone 'Aha, I have created a clone of you and am going to torture it!', to which you might reply 'So? Doesn't hurt me though'.

 

[woxihuanni]

For one thing, I have zero respect for quantum people. They don't know what they are talking about. There is a quantum person who also tries to do something in my field, and she is fucking batshit clueless and unhinged in her 'work' in my field. She doesn't understand anything at all. Why should I try trust that cunt's work in the playing field of unfuckable nerds if she cannot keep to the scientific method in my own field?

We will die and that will be that. Plus, what is all that shit good for when we ARE mortal anyway? If there is a hell and you don't kill yourself, will you stay out of it? No.

 

[autumnal]

For one thing, I have zero respect for quantum people. They don't know what they are talking about. There is a quantum person who also tries to do something in my field, and she is fucking batshit clueless and unhinged in her 'work' in my field. She doesn't understand anything at all. Why should I try trust that cunt's work in the playing field of unfuckable nerds if she cannot keep to the scientific method in my own field?

We will die and that will be that. Plus, what is all that shit good for when we ARE mortal anyway? If there is a hell and you don't kill yourself, will you stay out of it? No.

Wow. I think this would have to be the first time I have ever heard the word 'quantum' and the word 'cunt' used by the same person, let alone in the same paragraph!

 

[woxihuanni]

Wow. I think this would have to be the first time I have ever heard the word 'quantum' and the word 'cunt' used by the same person, let alone in the same paragraph!

Hehe, good to see you laugh

 

[Jessica5]

Yes, but I don't think that response actually addresses my question...?

Some of the versions of you that would live forever have yet to split from the current you yet.

 

[autumnal]

Some of the versions of you that would live forever have yet to split from the current you yet.

Yes, but even when they do, none of them are the same set of consciousness as the 'me' currently writing this post, nor will they ever be.

 

[KLUF]

Quantum immortality might actually be a thing. I think all of us here have experienced (at least I have), possibly several times, something that could have killed us and yet we survived. If you didn't, you naturally wouldn't have consciousness by now.

So, in a nutshell, it appears that if you experience consciousness, you are "death-proof". But only from your perspective. From the perspective of others you might still die in, say, a car accident, whereas from your point of view you may end up bedridden.
Here comes the second tricky and scary part - you don't need your whole body to survive, only your brain (mind).

 

[TAW122]

I guess if I lose conscious through death, but a part of me lives on, yet I won't be able to experience it (can't hear, taste, feel, see, smell, etc.), then from my point of view, I would be dead and unaware of even my own existence. I don't think it would be too bad because again, I wouldn't be around to witness or experience it (from my perspective, I'm in constant nothingness - as if before I was born/conceived).

 

[MKWRFKLV]

So I actually thought a lot about this a couple of years ago. I was so certain that I would finally CTB.

It was in 2018--I went to bed this one night with the full intention. I had my handgun cocked and loaded, right next to my head. Any slight brush of the trigger could have been it.

However, the next morning I woke up, and the gun was still there next to my head. Part of me wondered whether I had actually done it and if I was just living in some phantasm of life . . .

That's when I discovered quantum immortality, and wondered whether I was now simply living in one of the lives where it didn't happen. Needless to say I was disappointed, if not somewhat distraught.

But there's one major problem with the theory: after enough time, there is 100% chance that you will have died in all the universes in which you exist. Human beings (fortunately) do not live forever.

I'm not convinced I ever did pull the trigger.

And I still want to catch the fucking bus.

 

[Jessica5]

So I actually thought a lot about this a couple of years ago. I was so certain that I would finally CTB. It was in 2018--I went to bed this one night with the full intention. I had my handgun cocked and loaded, right next to my head. Any slight brush of the trigger could have been it. However, the next morning I woke up, and the gun was still there next to my head. Part of me wondered whether I had actually done it and if I was just living in some phantasm of life . . . That's when I discovered quantum immortality, and wondered whether I was now simply living in one of the lives where it didn't happen. Needless to say I was disappointed, if not somewhat distraught. But there's one major problem with the theory: after enough time, there is 100% chance that you will have died in all the universes in which you exist. Human beings (fortunately) do not live forever. I'm not convinced I ever did pull the trigger. And I still want to catch the fucking bus.

There's no real scientific law against immortality. The only reason why immortality is viewed as impossible is because because in the one universe model (which is the conventional human way of thinking), the odds of surviving everything forever are so low that immortality might as well be impossible. As far as we've ever seen, the odds catch up to almost everybody after no more than 110 years.

In an infinite worlds model, there automatically will be some universes where you survive every crazy thing, so you'll literally be alive forever. Basically, everything that's theoretically possible will happen in some universe.

Note that you're really only immortal to yourself, and people in other universes will constantly witness many deaths of yours.

Eventually, you'll find yourself in some universe where you're by far the oldest human to ever live. You'd be 3,000 years old while the second oldest person in the world would probably be under 140 years old. (That's assuming they can stretch lifespans 20 more years in the future since the current limit is basically 120 years.)

 

[agentgeez]

So I actually thought a lot about this a couple of years ago. I was so certain that I would finally CTB.

It was in 2018--I went to bed this one night with the full intention. I had my handgun cocked and loaded, right next to my head. Any slight brush of the trigger could have been it.

However, the next morning I woke up, and the gun was still there next to my head. Part of me wondered whether I had actually done it and if I was just living in some phantasm of life . . .

That's when I discovered quantum immortality, and wondered whether I was now simply living in one of the lives where it didn't happen. Needless to say I was disappointed, if not somewhat distraught.

But there's one major problem with the theory: after enough time, there is 100% chance that you will have died in all the universes in which you exist. Human beings (fortunately) do not live forever.

I'm not convinced I ever did pull the trigger.

And I still want to catch the fucking bus.

That problem does shoot a big hole in the theory. There doesn't seem to be any getting around the problems caused by old age. Depending on your views on consciousness, perhaps only people who live in a timeframe where actual immortality becomes possible are conscious, although that's almost full-on solipsism. Maybe consciousness simply takes the path where it is able to survive for the longest, instead of trying to be immortal. A crazy idea could be that our bodies have some aspect that makes us live forever, or somehow dodges every disease and degradation, it's just that this is only true in our own individual universes that our consciousness is in, meaning we will never see it in somebody else; that sounds a lot like science fiction though, haha. Or imagine if in the far future, after we've died, our consciousness is simulated by an AI or something; that's quite frightening, especially if you've read I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream. Regardless, quantum immortality is an entertaining thought, but I approach it the same way I do with the afterlife or religion. It's a possibility, but no real evidence.

 

[Jessica5]

That problem does shoot a big hole in the theory. There doesn't seem to be any getting around the problems caused by old age. Depending on your views on consciousness, perhaps only people who live in a timeframe where actual immortality becomes possible are conscious, although that's almost full-on solipsism. Maybe consciousness simply takes the path where it is able to survive for the longest, instead of trying to be immortal. A crazy idea could be that our bodies have some aspect that makes us live forever, or somehow dodges every disease and degradation, it's just that this is only true in our own individual universes that our consciousness is in, meaning we will never see it in somebody else; that sounds a lot like science fiction though, haha. Or imagine if in the far future, after we've died, our consciousness is simulated by an AI or something; that's quite frightening, especially if you've read I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream. Regardless, quantum immortality is an entertaining thought, but I approach it the same way I do with the afterlife or religion. It's a possibility, but no real evidence.

Quantum immortality is not entertaining. It's the most downright terrifying theory to ever exist.

I do agree with you that quantum immortality isn't proven. The really scary thing is that it isn't misproven either. I think there's probably a less than 1% chance that quantum immortality is actually true, but that still terrifies me.

Attempting suicide is a really stupid idea under quantum immortality, since that one in a zillion world where you survive a jump off the Empire State Building and end up as a quadripelgic is exactly the world you'd wake up in.

 

[agentgeez]

Quantum immortality is not entertaining. It's the most downright terrifying theory to ever exist.

I do agree with you that quantum immortality isn't proven. The really scary thing is that it isn't misproven either.

Attempting suicide is a really stupid idea under quantum immortality, since that one in a zillion world where you survive a jump off the Empire State Building and survive as a quadripelgic is exactly the world you'd wake up in.

Oh, don't get me wrong, the consequences of quantum immortality are terrifying indeed. I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream is an appropriate comparison for the topic as a whole, since we're looking at a fate of helpless suffering for eternity here. I meant more entertaining as a thought experiment, intellectually in a way, and of course from a distance where I can reasonably assure myself that it isn't real. It really creates a sort of dreadful scale if you're to consider that your standard 'mortal' life is only the prologue to something completely different and completely horrible, something that lasts forever at that. But even the most horrifying of concepts are entertaining in a way, you know? That's why the story I mentioned was so memorable.

 

[HeavensOpenDoor]

In 30,000 years, you'll still be alive.

Um yep, sounds about right... Sorry for the bad news guys.

 

[rhiino]

I am sorry, but this is so ridiculous. It is just scientists coming up with wild theories whatsoever. Of course they create theories that basically can never be proven false so that they can speculate on and on and on about it. It is just their hobby.

But hey, I will know when I take my N. Wait, I will not, I will be dead...

 

[esoragoto]

That problem does shoot a big hole in the theory. There doesn't seem to be any getting around the problems caused by old age.

Pretty sure most of aging comes from many, many tiny errors in cell replication that very slowly build up over time. Assuming parallel worlds theory is true, then any replication event should have outcomes where your cells don't make a tiny mistake, and there are worlds of infinitesimally small probability where most/all of the replication events throughout your entire life (trillions/quadrillions/maybe quintillions or more for the kind of long lives we're talking about) end without mistakes, purely by chance, preventing old age. And if quantum immortality is true, then that's probably the path your consciousness is on, sustaining you until stuff like consciousness uploading/etc. grants more statistically probable immortality.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

You better hope this isn't true, more than any other scientific idea out there isn't true. This is by far the most utterly horrific idea of all time.

It's an extension of the many worlds interpretation. It holds that since there will always be an infitesemal probability you'll survive anything, you're immortal. Sure, you'll die in a vast majority of universes, but you can only really experience the universes where you constantly survive.

In 30,000 years, you'll still be alive.

These quantum thought experiments just seem to me to be sci-fi scare scenarios to stop people ctb'ing.
Schrodinger's cat is only a thought experiment in quantum mechanics. As such, it has no experimental data to back it up, insofar as it purports to exhibit a paradox about large-scale objects. The probability rules of quantum phenomena do not apply to the large-scale deterministic universe.
i think it's cruel to inflict these scare-story scenarios on people who are suffering and unwell enough to consider ctb'ing. Especially as there is no data to corroborate even the hypothesis of two universes existing, let alone an infinite amount. The many worlds interpretation is metaphysical speculation.

 

[agentgeez]

Pretty sure most of aging comes from many, many tiny errors in cell replication that very slowly build up over time. Assuming parallel worlds theory is true, then any replication event should have outcomes where your cells don't make a tiny mistake, and there are worlds of infinitesimally small probability where most/all of the replication events throughout your entire life (trillions/quadrillions/maybe quintillions or more for the kind of long lives we're talking about) end without mistakes, purely by chance, preventing old age. And if quantum immortality is true, then that's probably the path your consciousness is on, sustaining you until stuff like consciousness uploading/etc. grants more statistically probable immortality.

Yeah, I mentioned the idea that your body could somehow avoid life-threatening degradation in the post, but called it crazy. If it's actually true that dying of old age isn't technically a 100% chance, then that would certainly result in an insane outcome, haha. You'd probably turn into some media phenomenon. Although, there must be multiple realities where your body manages to avoid life-threatening degradation, but I wonder which one your consciousness would choose? I wouldn't want to be stuck in the one where my body ages alongside it, or it degrades but survives enough so that my consciousness barely hangs on. Not that that would make a huge difference considering the universe has to eventually end anyway, leaving only you. It's definitely scary, but like Hell, it's too unlikely to take into consideration; it's just an unnerving little thought experiment.

 

[esoragoto]

Yeah, I mentioned the idea that your body could somehow avoid life-threatening degradation in the post, but called it crazy. If it's actually true that dying of old age isn't technically a 100% chance, then that would certainly result in an insane outcome, haha. You'd probably turn into some media phenomenon. Although, there must be multiple realities where your body manages to avoid life-threatening degradation, but I wonder which one your consciousness would choose? I wouldn't want to be stuck in the one where my body ages alongside it, or it degrades but survives enough so that my consciousness barely hangs on. Not that that would make a huge difference considering the universe has to eventually end anyway, leaving only you. It's definitely scary, but like Hell, it's too unlikely to take into consideration; it's just an unnerving little thought experiment.

Re: the universe has to eventually end: not necessarily. Even supposedly inescapable circumstances like the entropic heat death of the universe are, ultimately, a matter of probability. Statistics says that the universe realistically will undergo heat death if it doesn't go through anything else, but quantum immortality doesn't care about statistics. Alternatively, perhaps consciousness uploading can eventually give your consciousness the subjective experience of infinity, independent of any lifespan of the universe.