Re: Quantum Time Travel

From: <GSLevy.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 22:26:21 EST

In a message dated 02/25/2000 3:00:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
jqm1584.domain.name.hidden writes:

>
> > In summary, you can't possibly simultaneously retain objectivity,
> relativity
> > and consciousness. One of them has to go. My choice was to keep
> relativity
> > and consciousness, and become a subjectivist.
>
> Ok, maybe you can clarify something since that doesn't make much
> sense to me. Suppose one wanted to keep objectivity and consciousness.
> What would such a theory be like?

You would have to give up (first person) relativity and this would be your
theory I guess. However, it would be problematic. Giving up first person
relativity goes against Everett's assertion that no observer state in
superposition is privileged. In other words, giving up first person
relativity implies that there is an absolute real observer state and all the
other observer states are imaginary. This approach would be incompatible with
the MWI. It does fit the Copenhagen school and some of the other schools such
as, what I call, the spiritualist schools advocating the magical collapse of
the wave function, led by Eugene Wigner, John Von Neumann and I think, John
A. Wheeler. A common and significant feature of these approaches is the
privileged status of conscious observers which allows them to influence a
physical process simply by observing it.

Another alternative is to give up consciousness. And this, as I said in an
earlier post, goes against the only fundamental knowledge that we have: "I
think." This assumption would also render life meaningless. Your concept of
measure would have no value and trying to maximize measure would be
pointless. Mortality or immortality would be irrelevent.

As I see it, the only alternative is to give up objectivity.

George Levy
Received on Fri Feb 25 2000 - 19:28:36 PST