[ExI] quantum brains

[scerir]

Damien [quoting]:
> You know, you could take this idea a step further. Let’s say there are a 
set of
> increasingly accurate but also increasingly difficult to “see” physical 
theories T_1,
> T_2, … where T_1 is classical physics, T_2 is quantum mechanics, T_3 is 
quantum gravity,
> T_4 is some crazy membrane whatnot, etc… imagine you can get increasing 
computational
> capability at every level of this hierarchy. Since each is increasingly 
“difficult to
> see” for its precursors, in order to harness the capabilities at level T_j 
you probably
> have to do a lot to make sure those “hard to see” effects can be used, 
which probably
> isolates you from the precursor levels…. in this picture the quantum brains 
would
> isolate themselves from the classical brains, and the quantum gravity 
brains (needing of
> course to be near black holes) would be hidden to the two precursor levels, 
etc. etc.
> etc.

"It would be interesting to provide a toy model of an 'ultimate theory of not 
everything'. A scenario I can vaguely describe to illustrate the type of 
mathematics that could serve this purpose is the one of a toy Universe with 
logical structure resembling the one of Matryoshka nesting dolls, but an 
infinite series of nesting dolls and in a multitude of
dimensions (amount of energy, amount of complexity, amount of classicality of 
the apparatus...). From 'within' each doll it should only be possible to get 
information on neighboring dolls, even arriving at the point of fully mastering 
some of the neighboring dolls, which would then be the starting point for the 
next step of exploration. I hope a mathematician will soon have (or tell me of 
the previous existence of) such a toy model for the ultimate theory of not 
everything, but I have none to offer at present."
  -Giovanni Amelino-Camelia
  'The fairness principle and the ultimate theory of not everything'
  http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/AmelinoCamelia_fairnessShVe.pdf