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 

> 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

Reply via email to