mark@UNIX386.Convergent.COM (Mark Nudelman) (01/20/89)
Crossposted to sci.physics from comp.ai: In article <3550@ingr.com>, case@ingr.com (Bill Case) writes: > I wonder what the quantum physics folks would think about the robots > reaching a state of consciousness? There is pretty universal agreement > among quantum physicists that the universe "manifests" itself during > measurement, and one school of physicists believe that consciousness has a > profound effect on how matter appears. So what happens when the robots are > out there taking measurements and imposing their consciousness on "reality"? I don't think that conscious machines has any real impact on quantum physics. In fact (books like _The Tao of Physics_ notwithstanding), from the viewpoint of quantum physics, the important event is the MEASUREMENT, which need not involve consciousness per se. For example, consider a measuring device which detects a quantum event and prints the result on a piece of paper. The device is left alone in a room for ten years and then a physicist walks in and looks at the paper. When did the measurement take place, when the machine recorded the data or when the physicist looks at the paper? My understanding (which may certainly be incorrect) is that the measurement takes place when the data is recorded. I'm a little unsure about exactly what it is about the event that makes it a measurement, but I think it has something to do with the fact that the recording is permanent; that a non-reversible change in the world has been made as a consequence of the quantum event. Can some real physicist expand on or correct this? Mark Nudelman {sun,decwrl,hplabs}!pyramid!ctnews!UNIX386!mark
bickel@nprdc.arpa (Steven Bickel) (01/25/89)
In article <226@UNIX386.Convergent.COM> mark@UNIX386.Convergent.COM (Mark Nudelman) writes: > > [ deleted ] >from the viewpoint of quantum physics, the important event is the >MEASUREMENT, which need not involve consciousness per se. For example, >consider a measuring device which detects a quantum event and prints >the result on a piece of paper. The device is left alone in a room >for ten years and then a physicist walks in and looks at the paper. >When did the measurement take place, when the machine recorded the data >or when the physicist looks at the paper? My understanding (which may >certainly be incorrect) is that the measurement takes place when the >data is recorded. > The problem is entirely the fact that someone (with consciousness) had to design and build the measuring device. Their presumptions and the interpreters (of resultant data) are always relative to "their" consciousness. My mental model of electrons is one of nodal clouds of matter/energy fields. It was once grain-like particles. Whatever I stumble across next may very likely changes all this again and any machines I might construct are determined by my models. These models appear to spread/migrate/deviate through the scientific communities by the processes of conscious human communication. Steve Bickel
palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu (David Palmer) (01/25/89)
In article <1374@arctic.nprdc.arpa> bickel@nprdc.arpa (Steven Bickel) writes: >In article <226@UNIX386.Convergent.COM> mark@UNIX386.Convergent.COM (Mark Nudelman) writes: >> >> [ deleted ] >>from the viewpoint of quantum physics, the important event is the >>MEASUREMENT, which need not involve consciousness per se. For example, >>consider a measuring device which detects a quantum event and prints >>the result on a piece of paper. The device is left alone in a room >> > The problem is entirely the fact that someone (with consciousness) > had to design and build the measuring device. Quantum events can be recorded on devices which need not have been designed by an intelligent entity. I believe that one such case is tracks in mica, formed by fission products from the decay of radioactive elements. This is a clear case of a quantum event recorded by a serendipitous measuring device. If you want to really get metaphysical, here's a scary thought: the state of the universe which we see around us is just one of many possible intermediate states of the universe's wave function, and at the end of time, GOD (whoever she is) takes the lid off the box containing the universe and takes a look, and it all collapses into its final state. [If you start a religion based on this idea, I get 10% of the gross.] Here's the corresponding comforting thought: It doesn't matter if the Universe does collapse into a final state, as long as the the wave function we currently observe contributes to the final state. (Does it really matter which slit the photon went through?) David Palmer palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu ...rutgers!cit-vax!tybalt.caltech.edu!palmer "I was sad that I had no shirt, until I met a man with no torso"
bickel@nprdc.arpa (Steven Bickel) (01/26/89)
In article <9256@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (David Palmer) writes: > >Quantum events can be recorded on devices which need not have been designed >by an intelligent entity. I believe that one such case is tracks in mica, >formed by fission products from the decay of radioactive elements. This is >a clear case of a quantum event recorded by a serendipitous measuring device. > Measurement of the existence of the track presumes the presense or absence of something (particulate matter?). We will always have to measure our measuring devices capabilities with some form of consciousness. What forms of consciousness you choose appears to be determined by the foundation of life itself and your subsequent observations, assessments, and categorizations of these forms. The mobius strip logic of metaphysics. :-) Steve Bickel