> IMHO, this latter situation seem to be what D. Deutsch proposes as a test
for his MWI. If we can create a physical implementation of a quantum
computation >that has greater computational power than that allowed by the
classical (as per the Copenhagen Interpretation or other interpretations)
case, then it would >verify .MWI. A failure of such would be a

Perhaps Stephen, but I offer that it would ultimately only lend support to
the view that the classical model is incomplete. This reasoning reminds me
of the anecdote about the eminent astronomer who, when his student commented
on how naive it was that for so long people believed the earth to be the
center of the universe , replied "on the contrary, given a belief that one
is stationary relative to the celestial panoply and given no
additional hard evidence other than the sun, for instance, appearing in the
east -arcing across the sky - then sinking out of sight in the west, it
would be foolish to think otherwise". It was at the time the simplest
explanation, lacking any solid additional detailed observation. And it was
simply wrong.

On the subject of consciousness, I wonder how fruitful it is to conduct
thought experiments that infer the observer's consciousness. The reason I
wonder this is (because I am? no, that's another story..) that I'm reading
more and more of late about the "zombie within" concept where it seems that
while we operate under the illusion of "self" control, in fact some entity
that is the product of one's integrated anatomical and physiological
pattern is actually acting and reacting measurably before "I" am aware; even
when I believe I thought of and "initiated" the action. Whether or not one
is hallucinating, we may in fact all be in the end delusional.

My question is: if "real", how does the above situation effect assumptions
that are founded on the assumption of a single conscious observer/actor's
"first person" experience? Perhaps all we can safely refer to is the
observerand make no additional claims as to their, or even my own,
conscious experience *lacking additional supportive empirical data*.


<-- insert gratuitous quotation that implies my profundity here -->

Reply via email to