Le 02-juin-05, à 08:48, Lee Corbin a écrit :

What? And I thought that I had understood how the term "Observer
Moment" is used on this list! :-(

You are optimist :)

According to Nick Bostrom who introduced the term, "<x-tad-bigger>observer-moments are pieces of subjective time" </x-tad-bigger>(http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m1220.html).

I think that some people here associate them to computational states. I do that but it is not a 1-1 correspondence. You can associate an "observer-moment" to some (sufficiently rich) computational state, but to each "observer-moment" you can only associate an infinity of computational states. All regularly accessed by the Universal Dovetailer through many computations/histories. Now those computational state are relative state. They make sense only with respect to a most probable history/universal-machine/maximal consistent extension ... I don't think the ASSA people would agree, and I would appreciate they make more precise their notion of "observer moment".

Bruno wrote, incidentally, "With comp the relative measure from one OM
is based on all comp histories going through [those] states. We should
not measure the OM by its finite description...", and so it's possible
that he is agreeing with my usage of the term "Observer Moment"."


I hope so ;), we will see.


Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

Reply via email to