successive measurements

From: Stephen Paul King <>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:08:25 -0500

Dear Russel,

    What I am considering is this from The aspect of
a quantum system that can be embedded into an atomic Boolean algebra or
related classical structure.

    Could this partial image of a QM system be sufficient, given the ability
of QM system of simulating, function f, classical systems completely, to
act as a partitioning function, function g, over the operators for
observables as to seperate them out into mutually consistence subsets?

The idea looks like this:

 Q ----- > {C}
  ^ |
  | g |

    Where Q is a quantum system and {C} is the set of class of simulable
classical systems, f being the simulation function and g being the partial
(non-bijective) map from the Lindenbaum algebra of the classical systems to
    This seems to allow for some kind of quotienting or partitioning of the
operators that make up Q.

    I apologize if my question is ill posed. ;-)

Kindest regards,


----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Standish" <>
To: "Stephen Paul King" <>
Cc: "Russell Standish" <>; "Bruno Marchal"
<>; <>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:16 PM
Subject: Re: Tegmark is too "physics-centric"

On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:08:43AM -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote:
> Dear Russel,
> Could we associate this "psychological time" with the orderings that
> obtain when considering successive measurements of various measurements of
> non-commutative canonically conjugate (QM) states?

The word "successive" implies a time dimension already. I'm not sure
what you are proposing here.

> Also, re your Occam's razor paper, have you considered the necessity
> a principle that applies between observers, more than that involved with
> Anthropic principle? Something along the lines of: the allowable
> communications between observers is restrained to only those that are
> mutually consistent. We see hints of this in EPR situations. ;-)

No I haven't considered this second requirement. It would be
interesting to note whether it is a derivative concept (can be derived
from the standard QM principles say), or whether it needs to be added
in as a fundamental requirement (in which case comes the question of


> Kindest regards,
> Stephen
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Russell Standish" <>
> To: "Bruno Marchal" <>
> Cc: "Russell Standish" <>;
> <>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 5:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Tegmark is too "physics-centric"
> I think that "psychological time" fits the bill. The observer needs a
> a temporal dimension in which to appreciate differences between
> states.
> "Physical time" presupposes a physics, which I haven't done in
> "Occam".
> It is obviously a little more structured than an ordering. A space
> dimension is insufficient for an observer to appreciate differences,
> isn't it?
> Cheers
> snip

A/Prof Russell Standish              Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967, 8308 3119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                       Fax   9385 6965, 0425 253119 (")
Room 2075, Red Centre          
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
Received on Thu Feb 26 2004 - 11:19:58 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST