On Mar 4, 5:46 pm, Andrew Soltau <andrewsol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The measurement problem is the question of why, or even if, collapse
> occurs. Certainly no coherent concept of how and why collapse occurs has
> been formulated in a manner which meets with general acceptance. It
> appears, as Davies and others explain, the appearance of collapse is
> purely subjective,

It doesn't "appear" in an univocal way, since there are
such things as objective collapse theories

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_collapse_theory

> as Everett demonstrates.

MWI isn't usually presented as a subjective theory. Penrose
argues that it makes surreptitious assumptions about how
observers' minds work, but that is part of an argument against
it.

> In this case, consciousness
> is necessarily central, as it is consciousness, and only consciousness,
> which encounters this appearance of collapse and change.

It is only consciousness that consciously encounters everything else
too. However, that does not make consciousness *ontologically*
fundamental.

> We know there
> is an effective collapse, or the appearance of collapse, because we
> experience this subjectively. On the other hand, nothing in the physical
> world, including the physical body and the physical brain, can account
> for this.

Whoah! What he have is a profusion of theores, with no clear winner

> Whatever consciousness is, it appears to be the phenomenon at
> the centre of this process. In consciousness, change is encountered, the
> appearance of collapse, and, it increasingly appears, no where else. My
> paper Logical Types in Quantum Mechanics
> <http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00005554/> explains this in detail.
>
> Andrew
>
> On 04/03/11 16:31, 1Z wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 4, 2:20 pm, Andrew Soltau<andrewsol...@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >> I suspect we all may.
>
> >> Wong states that, important as a grand unified theory might be, "... it
> >> is lacking in one important fundamental aspect, viz., the role of
> >> consciousness [which] could in fact be considered the most fundamental
> >> aspect of physics."
> > How does he know consciousness is fundamental?
>
> >> Given that conciousness seems all too clearly to be centrally involved
> >> in quantum mechanics,
> > That isn't clear at all

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@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