Re: tautology

From: <GSLevy.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 01:12:47 EDT

In a message dated 99-09-15 16:34:52 EDT, Jacques Mallah writes:

<<
    BTW, while I'm posting I might as well ask, if you guys are so
 darn sure consciousness is continuous and that it somehow means it cannot
 end, how come you seem to have no problem with birth? It seems to me that
 your arguments would apply equally in that direction. How come you have
 no trouble picturing a boundary for it in the past? I'm sure you'll come
 up with some BS answer but this once again shows the foolishness of your
 position. >>

Congratulations Jacques, this is a great problem to talk about.

I assert that we can define time as the link between observer frames that can
be sequenced without violating the (physical) laws required for the existence
of consciousness. The Self Sampling condition is the Self which drives the
Anthropic principle which defines the physical laws. The links between
observer frames defines the MW as a network that branches as well as merges.

I also assert that consciousness defines the "direction" of the links. In
other words, it can only exist in one direction which we define as "forward,"
and hence there appear to be an assymetry in the MW network.

My third assertion (that rest on the self sampling assumption) is that once a
particular consciousness is created, this particular consciousness never
dies. Note the emphasis on locality. (This assertion resembles the final
anthropic principle by Barrow and Tipler which is more global in nature:
"Intelligent information-processing must come into existence in the Universe
and, once it comes into existence, it will never die out.")

This being said, the past is just as uncertain as the future. This can be
proven by performing an experiment in which the past is recorded and then
played back. The uncertainty of the recording device reflects the uncertainty
and actual multiplicity of the past(s).

Regarding the lack of boundaries in the future and in the past, here are some
scenarios:

1) Toward the future: as death apparently approaches, events which are more
and more unlikely actually occur to prolong life. (i.e., new drugs
discovered, aliens landing on earth bringing new life saving technology...
etc... )

2) Toward the past: We are newborn babies with very dim consciousness and few
memories. Birth approaches (going backward in time), we become fetuses, and
embryos... loss of consciousness occurs in most branches. Self Sampling
ceases to be possible. However, very few "branches" ("merges" in forward
time) involve states of higher consciousness being degraded to the fetal
state of low consciousness, that is of being highly conscious before birth
and then losing memories. Scenarios are difficult to come by and rely on
science fiction and religious allegories and , so bear with me.... For
example being just part of a (computer) simulation (Re: Simulacron by Daniel
Galouye of a previous post by Marchal) in which we may assume that this
erasing of memory process actually happens... or being (sentient) angels with
memories and receiving the body of a newborn, thereby losing our
memories..................................
   
............Remaining immortal while going backward in time somehow does not
have the same urgency as going forward in time.

George Levy
Received on Wed Sep 15 1999 - 22:17:01 PDT