Hi Brent,
> > Brent Meeker wrote: > > > >> BreMe: > >> Bohm's QM is empirically identical with non-relativistic >>> Schroedinger QM - makes exactly the same predictions. So >>> what does it have to do with AI and the duplication of >>> brains? > > >BruMa: > > We (John + me) were refering to Bohm's book "the implicate >> order" where Bohm takes some non comp stand. > >> Also his interpretation of QM is contradictory with comp, in >> the sense than he does not attribute consciousness to the >> people in the other branches, > >BreMe: But in BQM there are no "other branches". The world is >completely deterministic. The apparent randomness is just a >reflection of our incomplete knowledge of the universal >psi-function. BruMa: I disagree: in Bohm QM there *are* other branches. This follows from the fact that there is no collapse. The SWE is obeyed. Bohm just add a potential which forces a (mysterious) set of particles with very special initial conditions to follow one branch of the universal superpositions. But to explain the interference Bohm accepts the existence of the other branches even if they are lacking particles. And to explain the behavior of a quantum computer even in just "our" branch, a Bohmian must accept that the computers of the other branches are able to make reasoning like any AI, even if they lacks particles. So Bohm is forced to abandon comp, as he does. (This illustrates also that existence of particles is hardly necessary with comp). Bruno
