Re: Causation: Light Cone Causality vs Probable Influence

From Osher Doctorow mdoctorow@xxxxxxxxxxx

The usual expression is "measurement collapses the wave function", at
least in the old interpretation, but somebody or something is doing the
measurement, so there's nothing wrong with calling it a (generalized)
Observer.

I also should remind readers that with Quantum Computers not too far
off plausibly, we're reaching the point where even infinite
Knowledge/Semantic Information is a possibility, and with black holes
we've reached the point where infinite tidal forces arguably exist. If
the Universe isn't closed, which is at least possible, then infinite
distance is a distinct possibility. So "finite speed/velocity" become
rather exceptional if they apply. Many of the other "upper bounds" of
physics have been broken, at least in plausible theories. 3 + 1
spacetime is quite commonly challenged in Kaluza-Klein,
Randall-Sundrum, and other theories. With eukaryotes and prokaryotes,
even the requirement that life needs light or other "minimal
environments" seems to be challenged.

Every time that an invention or discovery occurs, some "upper bound" or
"lower bound" is broken arguably.

Osher Doctorow

.