On 31 Oct 2011, at 06:30, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/30/2011 5:13 PM, Nick Prince wrote:
On Oct 30, 8:56 pm, Russell Standish<li...@hpcoders.com.au> wrote:
My point about the unitary evolution was that the clicking of the
Geiger counter is not a unitary process - and until you hear it,
you remain in
- Show quoted text -
I thought that in the everett interpretation everything was unitary?
Right. In Everett's interpretation Nick's consciousness exists in
many superpositions and there must be some additional mechanism of
consciousness that accounts for the separation of these conscious
streams of experience.
That is just memory of the experiencer. It is not conc"eptually
different than the mechanist first person indeterminacy.
I agree that in Everett everything evolve unitarily.
This would be the same mechanism that collapses the wave function in
the Copenhagen interpretation - something like decoherence except
that when the cross terms become sufficiently small they become
Decoherence is just entanglement, as see from a chosen basis.
This would be a "small" non-unitary step. But it requires that
there be distinguished variables in which the density matrix becomes
diagonal - the "pointer basis".
If reality is discrete. If, not matrix might never become diagonal,
and in that case QTI follows, and first person, from their first
person view cannot be annihilated. With mechanism, it is trivial that
only this happen (no first person annihilation) and mechanism favor
the existence of some continuous (real) observable. I think.
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