On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King <stephe...@charter.net> wrote: > Hi Brent and Everything List Members, > > Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue that the > Schrodinger Equation does not work to generate a sequencing of Observer > moments for multiple interacting observers because it assumes a physically > unreal notion of time, the Newtonian Absolute time which is disallowed by > the experimentally verified theory of general relativity. I will concede > that I might be mistaken in my claim that the complex valuation of the > observables (or, in the state vector formalism, the amplitudes) nor the > hermiticity will generate a natural or well ordering that can be used to > induced an a priori sequencing of the OMs, but I would like to see an > argument that it does. Is there one? The paper by Ischam argues that there > is not... > I see this problem of OM sequencing as separate from the ideas about > clocks since clocks are a classical concept that depends, in a QM universe, > on decoherence or something similar to overcome the effects of the HUP on > its hands. > > Onward! > > Stephen
The subjective sequencing is independent of any real world sequence that might occur. Today is Monday and I recall that yesterday was Sunday. I assume that my brain generated Sunday's subjective experiences first and then used them to generate Monday's. But this need not necessarily be the case: it could be that that Sunday was generated a century ago in real time, or not generated at all, and my memories of it are false ones. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.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.