>From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 11:44 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Definitation of Observers
>At 03:40 AM 4/26/2004, you wrote:
>>An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical
>process) which engages
>>in the processing and storage
>>of information about its surroundings in space-time.
>In my opinion the most such a "pattern" can do is
>contain current features
>that may in part be the result of past collisions with
>other patterns -
>assuming a "History" of some sort exists for this universe.
This seems like a failure to communicate because of mixing levels
of description. If you're going to define "observer" as a pattern
you need to say what kind of pattern it is. If you skip to a
functional, "processing and storage" or intentional "engages in"
level of description then you introduce terms with no definite
relation to patterns.