Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: The halting problem revisited Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:41:25 +0100 Organization: Dirk Bruere at Neopax Lines: 39 Message-ID: <8vgtoiFikcU3@mid.individual.net> References: <8v727mF46lU1@mid.individual.net> <8vbuiaFbm7U1@mid.individual.net> <8vd51lFlq1U1@mid.individual.net> <8ve17fFto9U1@mid.individual.net> <8vedndFt19U1@mid.individual.net> <8vef1uF8n9U1@mid.individual.net> <8ver27F5ouU1@mid.individual.net> Reply-To: dirk.bruere@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net RRa0Qi75sN/AjlvkJ+FhAQnUu353nsDWs4iAUuNXssLGxYZsGW Cancel-Lock: sha1:i0jSz0MZyy1IQYfgVaV9h73aTvM= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 In-Reply-To: Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:2593 On 30/03/2011 09:05, Michal Kleczek wrote: > javax.swing.JSnarker wrote: > >> On 29/03/2011 3:43 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: >>> Wigner designed the experiment to illustrate his belief that >>> consciousness is necessary to the quantum mechanical measurement >>> process. If a material device is substituted for the conscious friend, >>> the linearity of the wave function implies that the state of the system >>> is in a linear sum of possible states. It is simply a larger >>> indeterminate system. >> >> Thing is, it requires not only positing a collapse mechanism that is >> non-unitary, non-Lorentz-invariant, non-time-reversible, and on and on >> and on, but also positing a dichotomy between things that constitute a >> "material device" and some other sort of stuff that does not (but you >> can bet the name for it would start with an "S" and rhyme with "hole", >> and be suggested as proof of the existence of some dude whose name >> rhymes with Todd). >> >> Or we can posit that Wigner's friend is also a "material device", in >> which case you realize that Wigner's friend just gets replicated into >> parallel worlds, and so does Wigner, and so does everyone eventually. > > I'm not an expert in all this stuff at all but my thinking is: > If existence of parallel Wigners cannot be disproved experimentally (by > definition of "parallel") the whole idea is not really science anymore. > Since Wigner is not able to verify existence of parallel Wigners then by > applying Ockham's razor he should just ignore them (and try another > explanation which would be more scientific). I think the whole problem of modern physics is that it has gone up alleyways populated with the untestable. The most notorious example is String Theory. For all the testable scientific predictions it makes it might as well be a branch of theology. -- Dirk http://www.neopax.com/technomage/ - My new book - Magick and Technology