Saibal Mitra writes: > This is actualy another argument against QTI. There are only a finite number > of different versions of observers. Suppose a 'subjective' time evolution on > the set of all possible observers exists that is always well defined. > Suppose we start with observer O1, and under time evolution it evolves to > O2, which then evolves to O3 etc. Eventually an On will be mapped back to O1 > (if this never happened that would contradict the fact that there are only a > finite number of O's). But mapping back to the initial state doesn't > conserve memory. You can thus only subjectively experience yourself evolving > for a finite amount of time.
Unless... you constantly get bigger! Then you could escape the limitations of the Bekenstein bound. Hal Finney
