The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: An essay in futility, too long to read :)  (Read 280074 times)

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1700 on: 22/02/2016 08:05:59 »
Almost poetry, five :)

Everything is in a flux, but as soon you pass it, it's history. Whether history exist after its passed? It happened, didn't it? Even if you can't remember it. We're not meant to remember everything, the brain doesn't work that way, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. That's those probabilities falling out. When it comes to what people choose to remember that's a different thing, colored by preconceptions hopes etc.
=

And stuff that made such an impression on you, that you can't forget I should add. Doesn't need to be exactly factual, the brain still works as above, but horrific situations will imprint themselves, and be very hard to let go. One good reason to avoid creating them for each other.

« Last Edit: 22/02/2016 08:17:39 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1701 on: 22/02/2016 08:51:25 »
When it comes to different types of logic, as Boolean logic, it works very well digitally, and can copy a lot of real life situations. Inside its limits its perfectly consistent, but it won't make a brain. If one look at guys as Einstein or Feigenbaum, Grigori Perelman or Shinichi Mochizukithey they all step outside what is assumed, to then more or less create the mathematics that explain. This one might be interesting http://www.nature.com/news/the-biggest-mystery-in-mathematics-shinichi-mochizuki-and-the-impenetrable-proof-1.18509
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1702 on: 22/02/2016 10:33:32 »
I see at least two ways of avoiding 'horrific situations'. One that is ideal, it builds on each one of us being aware of them, and so refuse to create them. The other is also personal, and come from a story I read about this guy in China. He was there under one or another 'internal cleansing' of undesirable thoughts and attitudes, going on for some year or so. As the situation developed he just disappeared from his neighborhood, to come back after this 'cleansing' had taken its turn, and worn out. As his neighbors asked how he had managed, he just told them he had taken a walk to nearby Tibet :) Reminds me of a 'walkabout', and yes, it's tao. Although I prefer the ideal, I guess the second approach will be the more practical one. No way anyone can wake one that refuse.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1703 on: 22/02/2016 16:57:13 »
What this kind of reasoning knits to is 'gametheory', which as far as I can see is a question of self interests. Game theory is not predicting the future, it's looking at what might motivate someone to act in a for you preferable way, alternatively just trying to get to a best guess of what someone will do. And depending on the stakes, if you get it wrong you can get it horribly wrong.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1704 on: 22/02/2016 17:08:06 »
As with everything else, Game theory is only as good as the questions you ask. Presuming something will influence the answer. Like NATO recently presuming that limited nuclear wars is a thing that can be done, wanting to change its military doctrine. You don't need game theory to see that this idea would be a escalation.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1705 on: 22/02/2016 17:25:13 »
Try this one for size.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/does-god-play-dice.html

There is no way to predict a future, that I know of? What we do is guess, using whatever knowledge we can gather. You can turn it around and ask yourself if you know any one, think tank or not, that consistently has been correct about the future. Or just have a look in those magazines from the fifties that described how the next century would look like. They were no different from us, no new ways of 'knowing the future' has come to light, that I know of.

 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1706 on: 22/02/2016 17:29:48 »
That was the sole point of having MAD. It created a situation in where all parties saw that the win would be a loss. But change that to one where we assume that a limited nuclear war is possible, and you change the game. So, does right and wrong exist?
==


MAD 'mutually assured destruction'


« Last Edit: 22/02/2016 17:33:12 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1707 on: 22/02/2016 17:46:45 »
We've never been that good on long scale planning, have we? Unless you count in things as Stonehenge possibly? And the pyramids naturally :)

Your self interests, taking a longer time perspective is not necessarily the self interests that benefit you short term. Global warming, and what we call the 'agreements on global warming' only goes to prove it. Those agreements won't stop it, neither will any killing of cows, or becoming a vegetarian. There's a lot of ridiculous ideas out there, but they work, why? They fit our short term self interests.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1708 on: 22/02/2016 17:54:13 »
So, how can we change?

By forcing each other, or by looking at oneself. The current structures only seem to allow for force, too few that are prepared to stop just to start question themselves. We don't have that kind of culture(s), allowing it, anymore, nowhere I know of at least. There are some traditions, but...

It's weird, as we had them, there was no real need for them, except possibly spiritual. Now, when we really need time to sit down and ponder what we think is worth living for, it doesn't exist anymore. At the same time as we accelerate into a world where a button push is all it takes.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1709 on: 22/02/2016 18:05:48 »
Then the next question should be. Do you think we will force each other to acknowledge the reality of global warming? I don't think so, fracking was the answer to oil resources diminishing, wasn't it? As well as geopolitical independence. We're built around self interests, and we want it now.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1710 on: 22/02/2016 18:21:41 »
What it means should be a drastically changed world. One containing mass migrations, where people will flee to save themselves and their kids from life's no longer worth living. And yes, it's a best guess, but I think a fair one. It should also mean 'Festung Europa', no matter if you're in, or out, of the EU, the same goes naturally for most other modern states. Hope I'm wrong.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1711 on: 29/02/2016 01:31:40 »
Let's get back to many worlds theory. In it we have probabilities, those all 'falls out'. Somewhere there seem to be an assumption of what I call our 'priority' for it to exist. But if it exist there should be no priority, which then mean that everything must coexist. Whether that should be seen as time doesn't exist, or that it does, seem to me to become a matter about from 'where' you stand looking at it. If you want this world/universe, that we know of experimentally, to be the one defining it you also should find yourself introducing time. That as nothing can exist 'fall out' until it does here, to me it gives us a presumed priority time wise. If many worlds would exist it has to coexist, if it does then 'time lines/histories' are in some ways illusions from that perspective, as there can't be a beginning and an end. The only thing that would create it would be us from our more limited perspective. But that is just one way to look at it, if you add 'free will' as the thing creating those time lines, then you have a 'static universe', but as it has no limits I can see, probabilities bifurcating into new probabilities, in their turn generating new bifurcations, generating new probabilities, bifurcating into, ad nauseum...? And if we define no priority to it, then it 'coexist'.

What is a infinity?
What is HUP?
Do you choose?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1712 on: 29/02/2016 01:38:18 »
A world defined by self interests, and lack of free will seems to me to become a very fatalistic world. It's world where Dictators does what they do because they have to. It's also a world where you no longer can discuss right or wrong, as everything just is as it is. It's a world where everything, from 'game theory' to 'physics' to 'love' becomes a matter of predestination. There is no longer a choice, and your cast is burned upon you.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1713 on: 29/02/2016 01:40:02 »
Expressed otherwise, it's a world I don't like. But how can I not like it if it is what is?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1714 on: 29/02/2016 01:42:23 »
Well, I would say I use my free will there :)
Not liking it. And so do you.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1715 on: 29/02/2016 01:44:56 »
Also: in such a world there can be no 'self interests' any more, can it? So why do we find 'game theory' to work? It's not a logic world, and this world builds on logic.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1716 on: 29/02/2016 01:52:18 »
But allow something else, give and call it a infinity of coexisting, let free will in all its different expressions be what defines it into a universe, and you get what we have. A place where we stopped throwing cats into the fireplace to get a good laugh. And then you suddenly have a open future, which also should be everyone's birth right,
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1717 on: 29/02/2016 02:08:34 »
Actually, it would in my eyes place logic at a same level as magic. It doesn't matter anymore whether you draw conclusions from statistics for example. It all becomes predestined, doesn't it? And so just a meaningless expression for, and from, a belief.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1718 on: 29/02/2016 02:11:28 »
The way out of it is accepting that it coexist, and 'falls out' giving us histories. And that the reason for how it can should be choices and circumstances.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1719 on: 29/02/2016 02:17:28 »
And, naturally, giving us a logic that we can follow. So, does light propagate?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1720 on: 29/02/2016 10:04:32 »
We have 'c'. I haven't done a two mirror experiment myself, but I accept it as a fact. Whether you think it building on Maxwell's ideas or something else doesn't matter for it existing. But with gravitational time dilation's http://www.wired.com/2014/04/nist-atomic-clock/ as measured to exist by NIST? There exist traps in arguing that 'c' is 'c'  everywhere :) Think it through and you will see that my arguments for explaining why isn't watertight either. But if it is a constant experimentally, and can be proved at any place, at any time, then 'c' must be 'c'. And that is the closest to magic I can think of, eh, don't get me wrong here. I don't believe in magic, there must be a logical reason for whatever we may find unexplainable, or we have a universe that as easily could be 'predestined'. And as I said, I don't like that.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1721 on: 29/02/2016 10:09:44 »
So this is where we do the logic dip and roll. Doing it is no different than using statistics. Both builds on histories, in this case the experimental history of 'c' always being able to be proven to be 'c'. We let the propagation go for it, but keeps the constant.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1722 on: 29/02/2016 10:20:56 »
If we do so we no longer have to consider whether 'c' only should be 'c' in a uniform 'relative' motion, and stop being so, in a acceleration. And if you as me want 'c' to be our 'perfect clock', you also find this clock to be a constant. What 'c' then measure, amongst other things as 'speed', is 'time'. Which is your local arrow.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1723 on: 29/02/2016 10:30:40 »
And yes, accelerating doesn't change your lifespan, locally measured. It's easy to get fooled here, thinking of the universe as having different 'time rates'. It has, but only relative you. That, on the other tentacle, do not change your locally measured lifespan. To see what I deem to be important here you also need to consider how we come to find 'repeatable experiments'. We do them locally, then communicate our results to each other, and if they agree we start to define a way for how the universe seem to work. And 'locally' your lifespan is the same, locally 'c' is 'c'.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1724 on: 29/02/2016 10:35:07 »
My type of locality may not be exactly the same you meet in a physics description, but it should be a close analogy, as it with communicating 'spreads' as 'rings on the water'. In this case it spreads by 'c', in a four dimensional continuum. Then again, this is what we see, but it may be more to it. Subtract or add 'dimensions'.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1724 on: 29/02/2016 10:35:07 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums