Schrödinger's cat...
Fuck yes!!!!!
I have finally found the corroboration that I needed to finish my hypothesis on the quantum mechanical nature of consciousness! Yay! *mad scientist happy dance*
Briefly: The conjecture I have been developing requires that time be thought of in imprecise terms. Just as the QM view of an electron is in terms of an electron cloud... I had to assume that the perception of time was imprecise, that time was effectively smeared for a conscious observer, (normally in imperceptible ways.) I had not been able to find really anything that discussed time in much detail, but apparently someone else has had this realization too:
"That prediction for sharply-defined time is a blunder, is probable also on other grounds. The numerical value of time is like any other the result of observation. Can one make exception just for measurement with a clock? Must it not like any other pertain to a variable that in general has no sharp value and in any case cannot have it simultaneously with any other variable? If one predicts the value of another for a particular point of time, must one not fear that both can never be sharply known together? Within contemporary Q.M. one can hardly deal with this apprehension. For time is always considered a priori as known precisely, although one would have to admit that every look-at-the-clock disturbs the clock's motion in uncontrollable fashion."
- Erwin Schrödinger
http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/QM/cat.html#sect14
Schrödinger! I am such an idiot... I had been looking for similar lines of thought in more current publications, but the verification I needed was in one of the papers by one of the old masters of QM theory. Let that be a lesson to you... settle for no one less than one of the best. ;)
(And the plus is that I may be on the right track if I am coming to the same conclusions as some of the greats....)
I have finally found the corroboration that I needed to finish my hypothesis on the quantum mechanical nature of consciousness! Yay! *mad scientist happy dance*
Briefly: The conjecture I have been developing requires that time be thought of in imprecise terms. Just as the QM view of an electron is in terms of an electron cloud... I had to assume that the perception of time was imprecise, that time was effectively smeared for a conscious observer, (normally in imperceptible ways.) I had not been able to find really anything that discussed time in much detail, but apparently someone else has had this realization too:
"That prediction for sharply-defined time is a blunder, is probable also on other grounds. The numerical value of time is like any other the result of observation. Can one make exception just for measurement with a clock? Must it not like any other pertain to a variable that in general has no sharp value and in any case cannot have it simultaneously with any other variable? If one predicts the value of another for a particular point of time, must one not fear that both can never be sharply known together? Within contemporary Q.M. one can hardly deal with this apprehension. For time is always considered a priori as known precisely, although one would have to admit that every look-at-the-clock disturbs the clock's motion in uncontrollable fashion."
- Erwin Schrödinger
http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/QM/cat.html#sect14
Schrödinger! I am such an idiot... I had been looking for similar lines of thought in more current publications, but the verification I needed was in one of the papers by one of the old masters of QM theory. Let that be a lesson to you... settle for no one less than one of the best. ;)
(And the plus is that I may be on the right track if I am coming to the same conclusions as some of the greats....)