I salute Lee's new subject designation.
I believe if we are up to identifying concepts with
common sense content as well, we should not restrict
ourselves into the model-distinctions of (any) physics
but generalize the meanings beyond such restrictions.
Of course: I am no physicist. My apologies.
To Russel's 4 coordinates of (any?) event: how come
the occurrence (event!) of a 'good idea' in my mind -
(mind: not a thing, not a place, not time-restricted)
should have t,x,y,z coordinates?
--- Lee Corbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Russell submits the following as clarifications:
> > An event is a particular set of coordinates
> (t,x,y,z) in 4D
> > spacetime. This is how it is used in GR, anyway.
> > An observer moment is a set of constraints, or
> > information known about the world (obviously at a
> moment of time).
> > It [the observer moment] corresponds the the
> "state" vector \psi
> > of quantum mechanics.
> and Stephen inquires
> > Hi Russell,
> > A possibly related question. Given your
> definition of events and OMs,
> > does it not seem that they complement each other,
> assuming that events have
> > more quatities associated, such as
> Well, Russell did also say that OMs and events
> seemed to him about as
> alike as chalk and cheese. It's starting to look
> that way:
> I quote Hal:
> Calling them [causal patterns] "observer
> moments" seems
> to be a bit of a stretch, given the enormous
> number of
> orders of magnitude difference between what we
> normally recognize as a conscious OM and one of
> trivial ones [e.g. a 302-neuron nematode OM].
> So, alas, it seems that the firmly established
> meanings of
> "event" and "observer moment" can't really be said
> to be at
> all the same thing. (Folks like Russell and Hal have
> using the term "OM" for years and years, and "event"
> a pretty standard meaning in physics.) Observer
> moments have
> to do with something conscious (and, evidently,
> pretty complex).
> And of course, as Hal wrote later on, consciousness
> exists on
> a gray scale.
> P.S. In normal physics an event, as Russell says, is
> with coordinates. Nonetheless I, for one, had always
> that indeed something was happening there, e.g., a
> photon was
> emitted. Well, in familiar physics we may also say
> that in the
> usual three-space there is quantum activity at each
> point. This,
> at least for me, makes the terms a little more