Reading your responses here, I don't think we have much to disagree
on. Like you, I don't need a concrete universe, with concrete time
etc. It was largely your thesis that convinced me of that. Perhaps you
confuse me with Schmidhuber too much !
I wouldn't say that time is illusionary. Illusionary
On 4 May 2005 Russell Standish wrote:
On this list, we seem to have two fairly clear camps: those who
identify observer moments as the fundamental concept, and those who
regard relationships between observer moments with equal ontological
status.
With my TIME postulate, I say that a conscious
I would add another point with regard to observer-moments and continuity:
probably there is no unique next or previous relationship among
observer-moments.
The case of non-unique next observer-moments is uncontroversial, as it
relates to the universe splitting predicted by the MWI or the
3 matches
Mail list logo
