An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical process) which
engages in the processing and storage
of information about its surroundings in space-time. Its information
processing is such that the observer
creates abstracted, isomorphic, representative symbolic models of the
structures and
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Lets go over this again. There is a 100% chance that some copy of Kory
Heath will find himself in the non-bizarre world, even though there will be
one billion copies which find themselves in the bizarre worlds. If that
single, lucky copy is not *you*, then who is he?
Hi Kory,
(Recall: the 1-9 points we mention can be find by clicking on
http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m5384.html )
At 00:04 24/04/04 -0400, Kory Heath wrote:
Thanks very much for your clarifications. I clearly misunderstood the
intent of your point 8. I thought you were arguing that,
I remember discussing this with you a few months ago. I am still not
convinced though :-)
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: Jesse Mazer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Verzonden: Sunday, April 25, 2004 06:19 PM
Onderwerp: Re: Are we simulated by some massive computer?
Saibal
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: Kory Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Verzonden: Monday, April 26, 2004 03:00 AM
Onderwerp: Re: Are we simulated by some massive computer?
At 10:48 AM 4/25/04, Saibal Mitra wrote:
This is the ''white rabbit'' problem which was discussed on
Hot off the press, via Boingsters:
http://www.boingboing.net/2004/04/26/many_worlds_theory_i.html
Many Worlds theory invalidated
Kathryn Cramer breaks the story on a to-be-presented Harvard talk on an
experiment that appears to invalidate both the Many Worlds and
Copenhagen theories of
Jeff Bone forwards:
http://www.boingboing.net/2004/04/26/many_worlds_theory_i.html
Many Worlds theory invalidated
Kathryn Cramer breaks the story on a to-be-presented Harvard talk on an
experiment that appears to invalidate both the Many Worlds and
Copenhagen theories of quantum
Hal Finney wrote:
The MWI is just the quantum formalism minus
wave function collapse and is therefore perfectly compatible with this
experiment, since the experiment is itself compatible with the quantum
formalism.
Would this experimental result actually be predicted by the quantum
formalism,
A powerpoint reviewing these ideas is at John Cramer's website:
http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer/PowerPoint/43
I suspect that advocates of the Copenhagen and MW Interpretations will
give different applications of their interpretations to the Afshar
experiment than Cramer does. His
BTW, just a caveat --- and I should've caveated the initial forward.
I'm not endorsing this or any interpretation of this experiment at all,
rather just offering it up to the list in case others had not seen it.
$0.02,
jb
On Apr 26, 2004, at 2:34 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote:
Hal Finney wrote:
I wrote:
Would this experimental result actually be predicted by the quantum
formalism, though? It sounds like they had a setup similar to the
double-slit experiment and found a small amount of interference even when
they measured which hole the particle traveled through, but I thought the
Even if there is only one World, there would still be a sort of Many Worlds
branching after each quantum observation, see here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0102010
Many worlds in one
Authors: Jaume Garriga, Alexander Vilenkin
Comments: 9 pages, 2 figures, comments and references added
Brent Meeker wrote:
I don't find any reference to Afshar or his experiment on the
Harvard web site or on arXiv.org?
Maybe it hasn't been written up yet, or it just wasn't submitted to
arXiv.org. But the Kathryn Cramer blog entry on this had a link to a
schedule of talks at a Texas AM physics
From: Jesse Mazer
Would this experimental result actually be predicted by the quantum
formalism, though? It sounds like they had a setup similar to the
double-slit experiment and found a small amount of interference even when
they measured which hole the particle traveled through, but I
Hi Eric:
At 03:40 AM 4/26/2004, you wrote:
An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical process) which engages
in the processing and storage
of information about its surroundings in space-time.
In my opinion the most such a pattern can do is contain current features
that may in part be
-Original Message-
From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 11:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Definitation of Observers
Hi Eric:
At 03:40 AM 4/26/2004, you wrote:
An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical
process) which engages
in the
On 26 April 2004 Kory Heath wrote:
I am definitely not claiming that only one of the copies is the real me.
Every copy is the real me from its own perspective. But to each one of
those copies, all the other copies are *different people*. This is true
from any perspective, including the
17 matches
Mail list logo