I confess I don't know how to answer your question. On the face of it, nothing I've read in Bohm would necessarily contradict the observer role you're talking about. He seemed to feel that consciousness and perception played an important role in the process of explication, and as far as I can tell there's no reason why that would contradict the cessation of "spooky action at a distance" if the observer's frame of reference changes.
OTOH it's entirely possible that Bohm did rule that out in something of his I haven't seen.
Yes, perhaps you could send me a link to the relevant document where Herbert discusses this. IIRC he's favorable to the Everett interpretation, no? (Maybe I'm thinking of Chalmers.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 08:24 pm (UTC)OTOH it's entirely possible that Bohm did rule that out in something of his I haven't seen.
Yes, perhaps you could send me a link to the relevant document where Herbert discusses this. IIRC he's favorable to the Everett interpretation, no? (Maybe I'm thinking of Chalmers.)