I think such cul de sacs exist only from third person perspectives.
the experimenter's view of what happens to the cat. When considering
perspective from the first person (cat) perspective, there are no cul
sacs for a much simpler reason: The cat might be mistaken, dreaming,
an altogether different being choosing to temporarily experience a
point of view.
No matter how foolproof a setup an experimenter designs, it is
capture and terminate the cat's continued consciousness as seen from
perspective of the cat.
The lower the chance the cat has of surviving through some malfunction
the device, the more likely it becomes that the cat survives via
extensions. For the same reasons, I think it is more probable that
wake up as some trans- or post-human playing a realistic "sim
than for you to live to 200 by some QTI accident (not counting
advances). Eventually, those alternatives just become more probable.
Hi Jason, thank you for this response. I can see where you are coming
from and this idea is intuitively appealing.
What I was trying to do was use a simple alternave unitary evolution
example which could open up possible alternative worlds thereby
allowing consciousness, from the ist person POV to have access to some
of these worlds. I chose a simple low dimensionsional space for the
eigenvectors |si>|aj> but in reality I suspect it is infinite to
reflect all possible alternatives.
I suppose I'm trying to bridge the gap between possible worlds and the
QM formalism so that I still feel in touch with theory that is known
be a good model of reality.
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
For more options, visit this group at