Thank you for the responses.

Brent Meeker-2 wrote:
> 
> On 5/23/2010 9:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> Hi Alex, hi Quentin,
>>
>> On 20 May 2010, at 15:19, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> 2010/5/20 awak <mustata_a...@yahoo.com <mailto:mustata_a...@yahoo.com>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     1. Hello everyone! I'm Alex. I'm a civil engineer with an avid
>>>     passion for
>>>     Popular Science books. I'm not a scientist, nor a native English
>>>     speaker, so
>>>     please excuse my possible inconsistencies in both Scientific logic
>>> or
>>>     English grammar. Again, sorry if this question has already been
>>>     posed.
>>>
>>>     2. I've just finished reading Russel Standish's "Theory of
>>>     Nothing" so the
>>>     following question, concerning Quantum Immortality, has its base
>>>     in the
>>>     information found in this book.
>>>
>>>     3. From what i understand, Functionalism and Computationalism
>>>     implies that
>>>     my consciousness will follow all the world-lines where i live at
>>>     a maximum
>>>     age - this considering that there might be a limit to "Quantum
>>>     Immortality",
>>>     even though this is in contradiction with the definition of this
>>>     concept;
>>>     for the purpose my question let's just say there might be some
>>>     worlds where
>>>     i live until 200 yrs.
>>>
>>>     4. From Wikipedia : "Syncope (pronounced /ˈsɪŋkəpi/) is the
>>>     medical term for
>>>     fainting, a sudden, usually temporary, loss of consciousness
>>>     generally
>>>     caused by insufficient oxygen in the brain either through
>>>     cerebral hypoxia
>>>     or through hypotension, but possibly for other reasons. Typical
>>>     symptoms
>>>     progress through dizziness, clamminess of the skin, a dimming of
>>>     vision or
>>>     greyout, possibly tinnitus, complete loss of vision, weakness of
>>>     limbs to
>>>     physical collapse. These symptoms falling short of complete
>>>     collapse, or a
>>>     fall down, may be referred to as a syncoptic episode."
>>>
>>>     So i take this as evidence that consciousness is not continuous.
>>>
>>>     5. MY QUESTION: "Why is this possible, for me to pass out, losing my
>>>     consciousness because of cerebral hypoxia, hypotension, or
>>>     because i am hit
>>>     by someone, considering that Quantum Immortality implies continuous
>>>     consciousness"? More to that, shouldn't we find ourselves in
>>>     worlds where we
>>>     don't sleep (where we are semi-conscious just like dolphins are
>>>     because they
>>>     sleep only with half of their brains) so we don't lose
>>> consciousness?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Quantum immortality doesn't implies continuous consciousness... it 
>>> just implies that there will always be a next moment. So you can 
>>> passed out but you will eventually wake up.
>>
>>
>> It is an eternally recurring question/objection to many-worlders. I 
>> think Quentin is basically right, as far as we agree that QM is 
>> correct and decoherence does its work. With DM (Digital mechanism, 
>> actually used by QM) the math is awfully complex. All we can say is 
>> that the measure one obeys a non boolean sort of quantum logic.
>> IF DM and/or QM is correct the notion of normality for relatively 
>> computable histories (the arithmetical world-lines) makes higher your 
>> survive a cerebral hypoxia in the normal third person sharable common 
>> reality. For irreversible damages, like with alzheimer, or with death, 
>> the question of the first person indeterminacy is more complex. By a 
>> 'galois connection', you normally augment the possibilities, but there 
>> may be jumps, amnesia, and it may depend eventually on what you 
>> identify yourself with.
> 
> But the "jumps" can be arbitrarily long.  So is a jump of 10^10yrs =
> death?
> 
> Brent
> 
>>
>> Those 'modern theological' questions are awfully difficult, but 
>> computer science can translate them into questions (or set of 
>> questions) of arithmetic (in the DM theory, that is assuming we are 
>> digitalizable machine).
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ <http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> Groups "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
> 
> 

That is exactly what i was going to ask.
Forget me if i am wrong, but if entangled photons are located at a distance
so large, which would be so hard for us to imagine, that we might say that
they are distanced at infinity but they were still able to be entangled, by
the same token couldn't we say that that "non-continuous consciousness" or
these observers moments between an almost infinite amount of time, might
also be connected so that "quantum immortality" would get a further proof ? 

Regards,
Alex!


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Quantum-Immortality-considering-%22Passing-Out%22-tp28620760p28654785.html
Sent from the Everything List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to