Registered: Dec 2003
>But perhaps it would be well to define what the universe is doing when it observes itself?
The universe observes itself whenever information about part of the universe is found in the universe.
For example, instead of a photomultiplier which I talked about before, lets change it to a spectrometer. The spectrometer detects a photon and determines its frequency. It then encodes this frequency somehow. I don't know exactly how. It might broadcast sound waves that state the name of the color, it might draw some number of chicken scratches on a cave wall.
The difficult part in realizing when an observation has been made is translating the language of the observer into something you could understand.
For example, even if we created a human being in our model, capable of very sophisticated conversation in the Enlglish language with other human beings in the model, this does not mean it will be easy to understand what the human is communicating in the model. We would have to translate the digital sound waves in the model to analag ones to understand him. That is in the best case scenario where we have an English speaking creature. Something not very likely to be acheived anytime soon.
But there could be simpler ways. For example, when a magnet turns to a pole, or when a sunflower follows a sun accross the sky. We can see that the system (be it a horshoe magnet or a flower) is interacting with some other system, there is information about the second system that may be cleaned from the first.
Thus, there is information about the universe in the universe, and an observation has been made.
>I would not argue that the idea is new at all
You are right. Many of the ideas here are thousands of years old. But understanding them in terms of computed system, and also understanding quantum and relativistic phenomena in this framework is a bold step in physics.
I say this because there are really two domains here:
1. the Universe, an objective reality
2. nature, the produce of our conscious experience
See science looks only at nature to describe it. It sees out and tried to place laws in what it finds. It has found the principle of relativity and the principle of uncertainty.
But my approach is different, truly a new kind of science.
Instead of looking out a nature and tryign to describe it, the approach here to describe something deeper than nature. This is the Universe. We can describe it without uncertainty and without relaitivity because the goal is to create nature as a by-product of the Universe.
By creating the Universe with algorithms as consciousness, we can create a nature from which emerges the principles of science, as opposed to designing a model Universe with those principles as rules or axioms.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged