Xref: utzoo comp.ai:3188 sci.physics:5687
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ucsd!nprdc!bickel
From: bickel@nprdc.arpa (Steven Bickel)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Robots & free will (was Re: The limitations of logic)
Keywords: quantum measurements
Message-ID: <1374@arctic.nprdc.arpa>
Date: 24 Jan 89 20:50:13 GMT
References: <3328@sdsu.UUCP> <43228@linus.UUCP> <539@uceng.UC.EDU> <3550@ingr.com> <226@UNIX386.Convergent.COM>
Sender: news@nprdc.arpa
Reply-To: bickel@nprdc.arpa (Steven Bickel)
Organization: Navy Personnel R&D Center, San Diego
Lines: 24

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