RE: Observer Moment or Observer Space?

From: Hal Ruhl <>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 21:34:29 -0500

Hi Russell:

You wrote:

>The time postulate is a requirement of observerhood. I'm not sure this
>means that time-like components are "in" the Everything, but I can
>accept this is possible.

>I don't know of any similar requirement for space, but I have tossed
>around some ideas to do with embedding dimension of networks. It is
>still very much an open question.

>What does it mean to "have a material aspect"?

I see my model as requiring a time like aspect induced by the evolution
triggering "endurance" meaningful question.

Selecting out space like aspects would inject net information into the
Everything - the out selection - so given a time dimension space dimensions
seem unavoidable.

I have constructed models in which matter is itself just a distortion of [a
discrete point] space time.

If applicable, these types of matter models would make matter a direct
consequence of the space and time aspects.

>Sharing the same universe is I suppose equivalent to being able to
>communicate. Rather than a conscious fly, it might be easier to
>imagine an AI that works much faster than human intelligence, thus
>having smaller OM durations,

I take this as indicating that you hold that something [information
processing?] is going on during an observer moment. This is as in your book
as I understand it so far. I do not see this in my model. In my model an
observer moment is a fixed state terminated by a transition to the next
state. The selection of a next state is in part determined by the
incompleteness of the current state which is solely a product of its history
and the random sub set of the incompleteness that gets resolved by the state
to state transition. Consciousness is inherent in the process of the
transition wherein both states momentarily overlap [for lack of a better
term], as some incompleteness is resolved [information added] and fresh
incompleteness is generated by that resolution.

Currently I see each such transition as being a state change for the entire
universe supporting it.

>but still able to communicate with humans
>(eg via a teletype interface). It would be interesting to see how
>different the perspective is.


Hal Ruhl

A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052         
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Tue Apr 01 2008 - 23:27:28 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:14 PST