QuanticEnigma said:
Hey guys, I'm having a bit of trouble getting my head around the quantum suicide and immortality thought experiment,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality" (Sorry to quote Wikipedia, lol)
IF the Many Worlds interpretation of QM is true, would this imply that the experimenter, if he dies, would have his consciousness "shifted" to the parallel universe where he survives the experiment, thus he is essentially "immortal", or is my understanding wrong here?
All such ideas as posited here (derived from the Many worlds interpretation of Quantum physics) or other idealistic Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics are basically variations upon the same theme, which is the basic question wether or not a world exist outside, apart and independend from our perception and consciousness of it.
This is the basic philosophical question. The major split in thought is that for Materialism, the question is answered affirmative, while Idealists answer the question negative.
In it's most consequential (and subjective) form, Idealism resorts to solipsism, which has the envision that the only "real" reality is one's own mind, and all other are creations or inventions of that mind.
Most philosophers (including Idealist) dismiss such a philosophy (there would not be much talking and discussion necessary, if the solipsist position would be affirmed) outright as non-sensical.
About this core idea then, let's phrase it as follows:
The only world in which I can exist, is a world in which I was born and did not die prematurely, and for this to be true a very broad spectrum of events must have taken or not taken place, which is only a narrow bandwith of possible worlds amongst all possible worlds.
From this then we conclude that just based on our very existence and our perception and consciousness of it, a whole range of things had to have happened or not happened, else this 'I' would not exist in its present form and state. So, does the fact that "I" do exist make any unique feature to the world, or even more, is it just because of my presence in the world and me being me, that this world is the way it is?
But then, this idea misses the point that - if things indeed were different (for example I died at young age at a car accident or my mother died in the war before she gave birth, etc. etc. etc.) - there would not be a 'me' to talk about it, and if I were never born, there still could be others that - same like me - express the same thing about reality.
Or, as another way of stating it, a different world, a world which would not contain 'me' would be a different world, but also possible world, so this is then to dismiss the idea that the fact that I am me, is not a unique feature of the world that 'had to be true', rather that fact is really indifferent to the world.