On 7/14/2012 10:26 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:

On 7/14/2012 8:47 PM, meekerdb wrote:On 7/14/2012 9:48 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:No, the reverse is the case. The "belongs to an infinity ofcomputations making you singling out some stable patterns" requiresthe prior existence of the "you" to select it. The observer (youhere) effectively is the measure via a self-selection rule. I cannotdiscount my own existence given the immediate fact that I amexperiencing myself as existing. Descartes' Cognito ergo Sum is apointed statement of this unassailable fact. We cannot put theobserver on a level that is emerging from the computations if theobserver is the one that is selecting the class of computations thatare generating said observer.How does this comport with Everett's QM which has it that there is nounique, persistent "you" to do the selecting. It seems a simplematter of logic that any theory which sets out to explainconsciousness cannot assume an observer, on pain of circularity.Brent --Interesting. So the unitary evolution of the SWF or state vectoris not continuous over its spectrum or what ever it is called ... thecover or span of the basis? I completely fail to understand your claimhere. Could you elaborate on your ideas here. I am interested in yourexpertise. I am just a very annoying but well meaning student.

`And I need to add that not only is there a persistent "you", there`

`is every possible version of that persistent "you". If there is Identity`

`via fixed point, then there is a "you' involved in some capacity. It`

`just might not be belonging to an entity that some people denote as`

`"John Clark"; it could be "Atom of Hydrogen". This rule applies to`

`anything that have a SWF or state vector representation. We are not just`

`considering "people". You might like to learn to love panpsychism. :-P I`

`am just following the letter of the law of MWI.`

`http://www.univer.omsk.su/omsk/Sci/Everett/paper1957.html`

`And furthermore, It is quite possible to represent very nicely`

`behaved non-well founded sets that have all kind of circularity in them.`

`The trick is that there is always a bound of the circularity. It is only`

`*actually infinite* regress that is problematic. Just because something`

`is possible does not mean that it must happen! We still don't understand`

`exactly how Nature implements the unitary evolution. We don't have a`

`accurate theory of quantum gravity. At the moment, physicists do not`

`known how to write out equations that can account for arbitrarily long`

`yet smooth diffeomorphism of manifolds that are fibered with nice and`

`well behaved quantum fields. All of the texts books cheat by using`

`semi-classical approximations to define the Lagrangian, figure of the`

`quantum field that fits that Lagrangian and tell you that they actually`

`didn't cheat.`

`If you think that quantum gravity is not involved, consider the`

`following: "The task of quantizing general relativity raises serious`

`questions about the meaning of the present formulation and`

`interpretation of quantum mechanics when applied to so fundamental a`

`structure as the space-time geometry itself. This paper seeks to clarify`

`the formulations of quantum mechanics. It presents a reformulation of`

`quantum theory in a form believed suitable for application to general`

`relativity." This is the first paragraph of Everett's famous paper,`

`referenced above.`

and

`{2)} "The continuous, deterministic change of state of an isolated`

`system with time according to a wave equation dy/dt = ?y, where A is a`

`linear operator."`

and

`"How is one to apply the conventional formulation of quantum`

`mechanics to the space-time geometry itself? The issue becomes`

`especially acute in the case of a closed universe.3 There is no place to`

`stand outside the system to observe it. There is nothing outside it to`

`produce transitions from one state to another. Even the familiar concept`

`of a proper state of the energy is completely inapplicable. In the`

`derivation of the law of conservation of energy, one defines the total`

`energy by way of an integral extended over a surface large enough to`

`include all parts of the system and their interactions.4 But in a closed`

`space, when a surface is made to include more and more of the volume, it`

`ultimately disappears into nothingness. Attempts to define a total`

`energy for a closed space collapse to the vacuous statement, zero equals`

`zero."`

But let us read further:

`"This paper proposes to reward pure wave mechanics (?rocess 2 only)`

`as a complete theory. It postulates that a wave function that obeys a`

`linear wave equation everywhere and at all times supplies a complete`

`mathematical model for every isolated physical system without exception.`

`It further postulates that every system that is subject to external`

`observation can be regarded as part of a larger isolated system. */_The`

`wave function is taken as the basic physical entity with no a priori`

`interpretation._/* Interpretation only comes after an investigation of`

`the logical structure of the theory."`

`Interesting! So what of this "external observer" (something that we`

`denote relating to "3p"...)? A wave function [or equivalent]? YES!`

`"This paper proposes to reward pure wave mechanics (process 2 only) as a`

`complete theory. It postulates that a wave function that obeys a linear`

`wave equation everywhere and at all times supplies a complete`

`mathematical model for every isolated physical system without exception.`

`It further postulates that every system that is subject to external`

`observation can be regarded as part of a larger isolated system.`

`The wave function is taken as the basic physical entity with no a priori`

`interpretation. Interpretation only comes after an investigation of the`

`logical structure of the theory."`

and

`"*/There does not, in general, exist anything like a single state`

`for one subsystem of a composite system. Subsystems do not possess`

`states that are independent of the states of the remainder of the`

`system, so that the subsystem states are generally correlated with one`

`another. One can arbitrarily choose a state for one subsystem, and be`

`led to the relative state for the remainder. Thus we are faced with a`

`fundamental relativity of states, which is implied by the formalism of`

`composite systems. It is meaningless to ask the absolute state of a`

`subsystem --- one can only ask the state relative to a given state of`

`the remainder of the subsystem/*." (Italics in original text.)`

Hugh goes on to show that observers are defined by:

`"We have the task of making deductions about the appearance of`

`phenomena to observers which are considered as purely physical systems`

`and are treated within the theory. To accomplish this it is necessary`

`to_identify some present properties of such an observer with features of`

`the past experience of the observer_. (my underlinning.)`

`Thus, in order to say that an observer 0 has observed the event a, it is`

`necessary that the state of 0 has become changed from its former state`

`to a new state which is dependent upon a.`

`It will suffice for our purposes to consider the observers to possess`

`memories (i.e., parts of a relatively permanent nature whose states are`

`in correspondence with past experience of the observers)._In order to`

`make deductions about the past experience of an observer it is`

`sufficient to deduce the present contents of the memory as it appears`

`within the mathematical model_."`

`What is memory except a means to allow for self-reference to occur?`

`Really?!`

You do understand that absent circularity it is impossible forconsciousness to exist. Go through Descartes' /_Meditations_/ and slowdown on the part about "can I doubt my own existence?" He was not thefirst to notice that circularity is the hall mark of consciousness.Why is circularity a bad thing. Please Remind me, I seem to haveforgotten.

-- Onward! Stephen "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." ~ Francis Bacon -- 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.