>From: Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Higgo James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>"\"'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'\" " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Everything is Just a Memory
>Date: Lun, 24 Jan 00 15:19:19 +0100
>James Higgo wrote:
> >I don't see the need for alternative theories. And like Liebnitz's
> >each containing an entire world, there is no need for communication
> >observer moments.
>Hard for me to swallow that literally. My question for you and Fritz
>Griffith: how do you define observer moment, *precisely* ?
Well, as precise as I can make my definition:
An observer moment is your experience of everything at a certain moment that
lasts for a duration of one plancke-time. Your current thought,
understandings, knowledge, emotion - everything that makes up your
perception of you and your universe, concious and subconcious (in other
words, the exact state of your brain) is looked at in one single moment of
Now, if you can accept that an observer moment must contain the perception
of a smooth, consistant flow of time, and that it perceives to exists in one
moment within this time, as I have been trying to explain in previous posts
- then I ask you, how do you know that you do not simply exist as this
single observer moment, believing, subconciously, that you actually lived
right up until this moment, and that in an instant that moment will pass?
> >It would be nice to derive the laws of physics from WAP but I am not sure
> >that is possible, ...
>But if my work is correct, it should not only be possible, but it is
>necessary (from a logical point of view).
> >...or that it would make us happier.
>This is a curious remark. In front of questions, solutions makes people
>happier (in general). Of course you can also forget the questions.
>Certainly pure contemplation is fine. Unfortunately it is
>not really in fashion in our short term overproductive world ...
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com