Re: Quantum Immortality and Information Flow

From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:41:58 -0800

Saibal Mitra wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan Colvin" <jcolvin.domain.name.hidden>
> To: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 05:49 AM
> Subject: RE: Quantum Immortality and Information Flow
>
>
>
>>Saibal wrote:
>>
>>>The answer must be a) because (and here I disagree with
>>>Jesse), all that exists is an ensemble of isolated observer
>>>moments. The future, the past, alternative histories, etc.
>>>they all exist in a symmetrical way. It don't see how some
>>>states can be more ''real'' than other states. Of course, the
>>>universe we experience seems to be real to us while
>>>alternative universes, or past or future states of this
>>>universe are not being experienced by us.
>>>
>>>
>>>So, you must think of yourself at any time as being randomly
>>>sampled from the set of all possible observer moments.
>>
>><delurk>
>>
>>I'm not sure how this works. Suppose I consider my state now at time <N>
>
> as
>
>>a random sample of all observer moments. Now, after having typed this
>>sentence, I consider my state at time <N + 4 seconds>. Is this also a
>
> random
>
>>sample on all observer moments? I can do the same at now <N+10>, and
>
> so-on.
>
>>It seems very unlikely that 3 random samples would coincide so closely. So
>>in what sense are these states randomly sampled?
>
>
> It's a bit like symmetry breaking. You have an ensemble of all possible
> observer moment, but each observer moment can only experience its own state.
> So, the OM samples itself.
>
> There exists an observer moment representing you at N seconds, at N + 4
> seconds and at all possible other states. They all ''just exist'' in the
> plenitude, as Stathis wrote. The OM representing you at N + 4 has the
> memory of being the OM at N.

This I find confusing. How is there memory associated with an obserever moment?
  Is it equivocation on "memory"? As an experience, remembering something takes
much longer than what I would call "a moment". It may involve a sequence
images, words, and emotions. Of course in a materialist model of the world the
memories are coded in the physical configuration of your brain, even when not
being experienced; but an analysis that takes OM's as fundamental can't refer to
that kind of memories.

Brent Meeker
Received on Sun Nov 27 2005 - 14:51:09 PST