# Re: Quantum Immortality and Information Flow

```Saibal Mitra wrote:
```
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Colvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
```To: <everything-list@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 05:49 AM
Subject: RE: Quantum Immortality and Information Flow```
```

```
```Saibal wrote:

```
```The answer must be a) because (and here I disagree with
Jesse), all that exists is an ensemble of isolated observer
moments. The future, the past, alternative histories, etc.
they all exist in a symmetrical way. It don't see how some
states can be more ''real'' than other states. Of course, the
universe we experience seems to be real to us while
alternative universes, or past or future states of this
universe are not being experienced by us.

So, you must think of yourself at any time as being  randomly
sampled from the set of all possible observer moments.
```
```
<delurk>

I'm not sure how this works. Suppose I consider my state now at time <N>
```
```
as

```
```a random sample of all observer moments. Now, after having typed this
sentence, I consider my state at time <N + 4 seconds>. Is this also a
```
```
random

```
```sample on all observer moments?  I can do the same at now <N+10>, and
```
```
so-on.

```
```It seems very unlikely that 3 random samples would coincide so closely. So
in what sense are these states randomly sampled?
```
```

It's a bit like symmetry breaking. You have an ensemble of all possible
observer moment, but each observer moment can only experience its own state.
So, the OM samples itself.

There exists an observer moment representing you at N seconds, at N + 4
seconds and at all possible other states. They all ''just exist'' in the
plenitude, as Stathis wrote. The OM  representing you at N + 4 has the
```
memory of being the OM at N.
```
```
This I find confusing. How is there memory associated with an obserever moment? Is it equivocation on "memory"? As an experience, remembering something takes much longer than what I would call "a moment". It may involve a sequence images, words, and emotions. Of course in a materialist model of the world the memories are coded in the physical configuration of your brain, even when not being experienced; but an analysis that takes OM's as fundamental can't refer to that kind of memories.
```
Brent Meeker

```