Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site looking.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: QM and Multiple Worlds
Message-ID: <331@looking.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 24-Aug-85 00:00:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: looking.331
Posted: Sat Aug 24 00:00:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 12:49:27 EDT
References: <486@talcott.UUCP> <1049@sdcsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Organization: Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont
Lines: 29
Summary: 

To me, in the multiple worlds interpretation, you should not talk about
"an observer moving down his world line."  An observer IS his world line,
by definition.

You didn't observe the photon as a particle, you *are* the world line
that saw the photon as a particle.

This translates as saying that the definition of a consciousness is
an entity that is (or I suppose to make it clearer I could say traverses)
a single world line in a universe of many.  To me, this is also Zen.

What this means is that you're a figment of my imagination, and I'm also
a figment of yours, and it isn't inconsistent to say this.

Now, being a concious human world-line is being a semi-continuous path
though a large dimensional space of all possible configurations of space
time.  That's what makes us special.  What QM and related topics might
be showing is that the path is only semi-continuous, and doesn't have
to be consistent at the lowest level, as long as it follows certain
probabilistic  rules.

So this notion is not "absurd", just somewhat unusual and perhaps
distasteful to our conceptions of consciousness.

As a note, I am not saying I believe all this.  Simply that is is
a possible consistent theory and should not be dismissed out of hand
as absurd (which I used to do.)
-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473