On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 4:31 PM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > > Now, in previous discussions the argument was made that you can't > consider a simulation of observers in a quantum computer because, by > definition, measurements must be irreversible.
That was never the argument. The problem that was raised over the simulation of people (and measurements) in a quantum computer was that measurement involves the formation of permanent records through decoherence. And many copies of the results so that many different observers can check what has been done. Decoherence is also necessary to find a measurement basis that is robust against decoherence in the environment. QCs can never do this. A quantum computer is not adapted to the formation of permanent records, and it goes to great lengths to avoid decoherence. Consequently, a person simulated in a computer can report that he has achieved all sorts of results, but he cannot produce any evidence of this. Personal memories are not scientific evidence. And it is doubtful if even personal memories could be created in a quantum computer -- QCs do not produce any permanent records before the final result is printed out, and personal memories are a form of (semi-)permanent record. Bruce -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLT1VtJbFiuTS7Uaa_BVd0eJibmSxndi-b1Y5hA0HoUgVA%40mail.gmail.com.
