Marchal wrote:
> Russell Standish wrote:
> >I raised this very issue in "Why Occams Razor", and came to the
> >conclusion that the only satisfactory "interpreter" is the observer
> >itself.
> And so the question resumes into 'what is the observer itself'.
> I propose the answer 'the self-referentially sound Lobian machine' (LM).

At this stage, I believe this is but one answer as to what an observer
is. Noone has proved that Bruno's Loebian machine satisfies my
"postulates of consciousness" (CLASSIFICATION, TIME and PROJECTION),
however it seems likely (the first two look like fairly trivial
properties of a Turing automata, and maybe one gets PROJECTION from the
UDA). I suspect many models of the observer are possible, including
non-deterministic ones.


Dr. Russell Standish                     Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967, 8308 3119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         Fax   9385 6965, 0425 253119 (")
Australia                                [EMAIL PROTECTED]             
Room 2075, Red Centre          
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02

Reply via email to