I wish to emphasize that according to a traditional realist's beliefs, observer moments are objective and real, and hence do exist, so that there is nothing objectionable about speculations concerning them.
Suppose that a mouse during some small time delta t is in a particular state (or set of states, if you wish to be picky). In the objective tradition we do not next inquire about what it seems like to the mouse, or what the mouse (read human) could report or recall about the moment, or whether this moment is "the same to the mouse" as some other moment. Instead, we suppose that at very *least* the entire brain state is what gives rise to the observer moment as a purely physical or ideal process. (In all likelihood, much less than the whole brain is required, but so far 21st century science can only speculate on what the proper subset of functioning is, or what the proper *calculation* is that's going on in those neurons which would be appropriate to use as the "observer moment".) Since there is *some* objective process taking place, it must be the case that this same, identical process is taking place at other times and places. At this point I would usually branch off and discuss the total benefit accruing to the mouse-person, but it's really a different topic. The final word: OMs can be viewed as objective processes, and efforts to find the simplest explanation considering Everything seem quite appropriate. Lee