On 08-08-2019 06:57, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote:
On 8/7/2019 8:47 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 4:59 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/7/2019 2:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 2:23 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/7/2019 8:30 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
This is made most clear in the case of a quantum computer. Where
the
quantum computer can be viewed as one WORLD (def 1) that contains
many
little worlds (def 2), where each computational trace constitutes
its
own little world, causally isolated from the rest.
Except those computational traces DO NOT constitute little worlds.
They
are not causally isolated. The whole function of the computer
depends
on them interacting, i.e. interfering coherently.
It depends on the algorithm.
If, as in my neural net example, interference is not used, the many
computations are causally isolated, and will remain so (FAPP) once I
read the output bits.
You seem to want it both ways. "Yes they are many worlds, but
they're not entirely or always completely causally isolated, so
they're not really separate worlds."
You're the one who introduced worlds and little worlds. My point is
just that doing computations with lots of qubits doesn't imply there
are separate worlds in which the computations happen; in fact it
requires the contrary if the computation is to come to a single
conclusion.
No disagreement with that, but my point all along is that "many
somethings" associated with the qubits in the quantum computer, can
lead to many minds which can have many experiences, when the quantum
computer executes computational traces which create conscious states.
Do you disagree with this?
No. As far as I know minds are classical like processes in brains.
That's why you are never really "of two minds". Superpositions
corresponding to neurons firing and not-firing decohere far too
quickly. See Tegmark's paper.
Classical objects do not exist in this universe that works according to
quantum mechanics. What happens is that due to decoherence macroscopic
properties of objects behave as if they are described by classical
mechanics, and Tegmark has shown that this is also true for brain
processes. This only debunks the idea that a normal computer could never
be conscious as e.g. Penrose has claimed. But because everything is
still quantum mechanical, a brain observing the z-component of a spin
that is polarized in the x-direction will still end up in an entangled
superposition with the spin and the local environment. The brain consist
of atoms and the many particle wavefunction of all the atoms in the
brain and the environment will evolve according to the Schroedinger
equation.
Saibal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1921ee1974d02526a4c85171c5360328%40zonnet.nl.
