Saibal Mitra wrote:
> >
> > To get the effect you were suggesting would require another type of
> > SSA, about which I have complete failure of imagination.
> I think it is similar. You have a set of all universes which we identify
> with descriptions or programs. Embedded in these descriptions are
> descriptions of self aware substructures. A measure on the set of all
> programs defines a measure on the set of all substructures. I then say:
> ''That's all there is''. The proponents of RSSA go further and postulate new
> rules about what the next experience of a SAS should be. What you are
> actually doing is promoting our experience of the flowing of time to
> fundamental law. However, this is something that should be derived from more
> fundamental concepts.
> Saibal

The flowing of subjective time is proposed as necessary for conscious
observation. In order for information to exist, there must be a
difference between two states. In order to perceive that difference,
there must be at least one dimension along which the observer must
move to experience that difference. Hence time.

Yes it is an assumption (or postulate). But hardly ad hoc.


A/Prof 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