To say that a system implements a given computation is to say that something about that system - some aspect of its behavior - is described by the computation. It is thus a way of characterizing the system. Precise criteria are needed for implementation. Once we have that, we can use it to study models of physics and see what they predict in terms of what observer-computations they implement (assuming computationalism about mind). I am applying this to the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics.
I am posting an explanation of my implementation criteria on my blog. It's drawn from my eprint
The Many Computations Interpretation (MCI) of Quantum Mechanics
http://arxiv.org/abs/0709.0544
but I expect to make a shorter paper just on this more limited topic.
My question is: is the explanation I give and purpose of what I am doing clear? Comments on the validity of the ideas are also welcome. Thanks.
So far I have the following posts on it (and see the main blog for more context related to QM):
Basic idea of an implementation
http://onqm.blogspot.com/2011/10/basic-idea-of-implementation.html
The Putnam-Searle-Chalmers Theorem
http://onqm.blogspot.com/2011/10/putnam-searle-chalmers-theorem.html
Restrictions on mappings 1: Independence and Inheritance
http://onqm.blogspot.com/2011/10/restrictions-on-mappings-1-independence...
