On Jan 3, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > Hi, > Is hurting or make the puppet suffer morally correct with your position ? > If it is not, then this is strange since they are only puppets and you > *are*...(means you can't hurt them because they aren't) This is simply > sollipsism and (un)fortunately completely circular. > > Also as you acknowledge other "pilots" existence in "other" universe, how is > this different than acknowledging simply the existence of other people ?
Günther Greindl wrote: > > This is the question of why _I_ experience the world as I do and not the > other worlds. This is not the identity crisis question of why am I not that person over there, nor is it circular, or solipsism (although if true it could lead to a philosophy of solipsism). This is basic quantum theory applied to the macro-world. Ever since Schrödinger disapprovingly amplified the uncertainty of atomic decay and showed that quantum uncertainty extends to the macro-world, this issue has been apparent. I am certain this "observer over observed" issue has been discussed before. Someone has mentioned that John Wheeler described this, describing a "free floating" observer that dictates reality all the way back to the big bang. He just didn't discuss the issue of pilots and puppets. In the instant I observe the contents of the box the uncertainty collapses, however, the colleague who walks in the room one second later in pilot form is not subject to my observation, for them the outcome of the event is still uncertain until they open the lab door and look in, at which point they branch into two futures defined by different pasts, me in tears (I love cats) or the cat alive and me happy. Their observation of me (tears or jeers) will correspond to their observation of the cat. HOWEVER, the colleague I observe (their observation) is predetermined (made measurably deterministic) by my earlier observation. Their observation will correspond to my observation, in a sense making them a puppet of the universe I observe. It helps to imagine a person inside the box wearing a gas mask watching the cat. They don't see a quantum uncertainty or a probability cloud. But from your perspective outside the box the indeterminacy of the cat as dead or alive now extends to what the person in the mask observes. There are necessarily two copies of the observer inside the box. When you open the box you connect to one of them. Also, the cat experiment box can have two doors and be placed in between two rooms, so that two observers in different rooms open their own door at the same time to see the outcome of the event. The outcome of one observer in one room has no influence on the outcome of the other. But having observed an outcome, each observer interacts with the colleague who observes the same outcome. This is a more complicated example of the EPR paradox, i.e., spooky action at a distance, or one outcome effecting a remote other outcome. The floating observer is constantly sampling a probability landscape governed by the whole of what is possible for a given event or situation. Each observation rules the entire scope of their o-region by turning the uncertainty of infinite possibilities into a finite observation. If lab personnel walk in every ten minutes each branches into both dead-cat / live-cat time lines as they learn of the cats demise. Same applies to what's behind every door in the macro-world. Sub-atomic decisions add up and trace forward to extremely varied possible worlds. Until we pick up and read the newspaper there is no definite news. We still live with the uncertainty of history back to the big bang every time we view deeper into the universe, or discover other planets around stars. There isn't just one world out there, or one history to select from, just as there isn't one future. Observations of what are naturally assumed to be other observers (how they response to stimuli, behavior, belief systems, intelligence, individual spontaneity) are inevitably subject to the same sampling process which decides if the cyanide canister has been broken. There of course might be a great deal of selection bias for various reasons, in the same way what is observed corresponds to the laws of nature. There is certainly room for Karma based upon the same symmetries that dictate conservations, forces, laws and constants. So suppose we do put a colleague in Schrödinger's box instead of the cat without the gas mask. The first sampling decides if they are dead or alive when we open the box. A second sampling is of how they react to having been put in the box and experimented on in a life or death situation. For the survivor, there is a very wide but definite range of possible reactions, anger, horror, crying, nervous breakdown, hidden resentment, disinterest, objectivity, laughter, excitement, exhilaration, enlightenment. Considering how a thousand different colleagues would react, there are distinct probabilities, let's say 25% anger, 15% horror, 15% crying, 1% nervous breakdown, 8% resentment, 1% disinterest, 2% scientific objectivity, 10% laughter, 17% excitement, another 3% are exhilarated, and wouldn't you know it, just a meager 3% report experiencing enlightenment from their nde, or 64% negative, 3% neutral, and 33% positive. Pretending this is accurate of what the observer experiences in others, the BIG question I am wresting with is, do these same numbers describe how 1000 pilot observers react. Could there possibly be a difference? Could there be a difference between sampled behavior and the behavior of floating pilots. Maybe observers are much more likely to react to situations in a particular way. For example, maybe observers are more curious about the world. This all becomes increasingly complicated and personal as we try to localize the observer or consciousness, since our own bodies are subject to quantum sampling. Most of the complications reduce to an issue about the linearity of time. I don't know how the concept of time can be maintained without some form of linearity, perhaps in the background of space connecting objects, or linearity exists in the observer or consciousness. Yet then here comes quantum mechanics and splits up one's linear experience into states, and it seems we are observing a movie film built of many individual 3D frames. As time progresses particular frames are selected, or sampled, from the whole of possible states. It is funny because we can write a letter for example, thinking it will get to other pilots, as I am doing now, but we have to know then that the response is made by quantum sampling. If we apply quantum theory to the macro-world, we have to give up the idea that there are single individuals in our environment who are continuously locked into the one world we experience. Although it follows that the non-local universe (the possible realm) is dictating what someone says and how they react, at very least we are interacting with a living universe. I have not suggested here that those person's who we observe are hollow or not real. Not suggesting that at all. Rather we are interacting more directly with the universe itself than we are used to imagining. Of course some would describe this as the observer and God interacting. I personally appreciate the idea of the Universe and God being synonymous, and natural Karmic laws. But again, are puppets and pilots existentially the same. Most recognize in a many worlds, multiverse, or anthropic scenarios that two identical copies of a given universe are the same universe. This to me is a simple existential fact, so perhaps each observed person is identical to each "floating" observer, so there would be no reason to differentiate. This doesn't eliminate the sampling issue but it does with great relief at least unite us together with other pilots. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
