Gevin Giorbran wrote:
> 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, 

Actually it collapses before, see quant-ph/0402146 v1.  It is shown that 
in a Young's slit experiment with C70 buckyballs, the interference 
fringes disappear when the buckyballs are sufficiently heated to radiate 
some IR photons.  No observer is needed, only the interaction with the 
environment.

> 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.
>   

"Puppet" implies you are pulling the strings.  So can you bend the 
universe to your will?

Brent Meeker



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to