The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: An essay in futility, too long to read :)  (Read 279763 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 #2375 on: 03/10/2016 09:55:28 »
Because if time doesn't exist, well, depending on ones definitions, then constants should be all equally existing, or 'non existing', shouldn't they? :) That's what I would call a 'static reality'.
 

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 #2376 on: 03/10/2016 10:06:15 »
Although I do say that time exist, and as long as one treat it locally there should be no ambiguities to it. Your ruler and wristwatch always giving you one same constant 'length, time', as well as all other 'measurements' you may think up. But using that wristwatch and ruler we introduce a macroscopic definition of what a locality is, don't we? At the same time as we create a ideal spot-like cerebral definition of it. So, Feigenbaums constants are no less anchored in our 'reality' than what that definition suddenly comes to be.
 

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 #2377 on: 03/10/2016 10:12:17 »
So one arrow, not several, but a strictly local one. that means time dilations globally, but as the most you can expect from that arrow is to shrink into a 'nothing' as measured relative your own local time, no time travels into the past.
=

the perfect description of that is a black hole, relative yourself, measuring at a far distance.
 

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 #2378 on: 03/10/2016 10:20:29 »
Locality have different meanings here. One is the cerebral, the other is about what scale a observer measure on. what is more 'physical'? How do you lift out/negate the observer from the observed?
 

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 #2379 on: 03/10/2016 10:21:44 »
I don't think you can myself
But I would like to, as it might be simpler :)
 

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 #2380 on: 03/10/2016 10:22:57 »
And that goes for all scales, either we can ignore the observer, or we can't.
 

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 #2381 on: 03/10/2016 10:24:21 »
not ignoring the observer is defining time to be real. Because that is what is used by it.
 

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 #2382 on: 03/10/2016 10:29:10 »
It also means that 'constants' is as 'real' as you, although it doesn't prove those dreams, or nightmares, you might get from it :) And that has to do with how one prove something to exist inside physics, our definitions of what is provable.
 

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 #2383 on: 03/10/2016 10:44:11 »

What then if we could shrink the observer and the observed into two 'grains', presuming there to be a discrete limit of observables (a limit of measurements)? A weird thought indeed, would time still be involved? As long as there is something able to interact I would expect it to exist. How about 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 #2384 on: 03/10/2016 10:49:21 »
So do we need the 'observer' to be conscious for this? Is having a mind making a two way mirror experiment more real than when there is no conscious observer watching it? I don't think so, as long as the experiment is as equivalent (the setup etc) as it can be. Introduce a different set of measurements and you will get a different result generally speaking, but assuming that we let a camera record it or a human shouldn't matter, hopefully :)
 

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 #2385 on: 03/10/2016 10:54:41 »
assume differently, and you've introduced what I would call magic, not logic. Now I think it was Heinlein saying that magic just is a 'future science', but I'm not sure I agree. If magic and science is equivalent I would go learn alchemy, starting today :)
 

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 #2386 on: 03/10/2016 10:58:43 »
You're the one setting up the experiment, you're the one deciding what, and how, you will measure. There is no magic to finding different outcomes to it, depending on those circumstances. there is just a 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 #2387 on: 03/10/2016 11:03:17 »
From such reasoning I will assume that at some scale 'time' must exist for/in a whole SpaceTime, and 'minds' does not enter it at all. 'Observers' then should be whatever interacts. that's simplifying it, and I like simplifying :)
 

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 #2388 on: 03/10/2016 11:31:50 »
You could also express it as reality is communication. Having a mind filtering, alternatively translating, this communication doesn't make it more or less correct. That I can't imagine how a chair perceive SpaceTime. unless we speak of it in terms of scales and interactions, doesn't make my own conscious interpretation of reality any more right, or wrong than what that chair experience. I have to assume that the physical laws that exist are the same for all observers.
 

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 #2389 on: 03/10/2016 12:07:15 »
The way to prove this wrong would be to set up a experiment in where someones mind change a outcome by just wishing for it. that means several equivalent experiments in where one prove ones wishes coming true :) in a statistically significant manner. Don't expect to ever see that experiment myself.
 

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 #2390 on: 03/10/2016 12:13:11 »
There is a slightly different version in where it on one tentacle is assumed that consciousness 'breaks wave-functions' into 'many worlds', no probability to it as all outcomes comes to be. On the other tentacle still assume it to be some sort of 'probability' defining to which 'world line', of all 'coexisting', you now will belong.

simple?
No
 

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 #2391 on: 03/10/2016 17:01:36 »
Let's repeat my view. A 'observer' is everything, animate, inanimate, interacting. And that 'observations' goes on even when I'm asleep, or for that sake forgetting to look at the moon. And that those local observations craves a, just as local, arrow of time existing. When you then lift this to a global description you find 'time', as defined by relativity.
 

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 #2392 on: 03/10/2016 17:05:15 »
Actually, assuming that probability disappear, isn't that predestination? doesn't matter which 'who' you happen to be, you're still predestined in that world. Or you have to come up with something really esoteric defining your free will.
 

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 #2393 on: 03/10/2016 17:08:08 »
Something like that experiment I referred to possibly?
Then you at least have a chance to choose, without it nothing you ever will do will matter.
It's predestined you see :)
 

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 #2394 on: 03/10/2016 17:17:51 »
for me its simple. I find uncertainty, probabilities, all of them offering a equivalence to the idea of free will. Then again, I don't try to reduce them into a world view in where every aspect is covered, as I understand many world theories to do. Instead I accept them on their face value. And you could also call it a matter of taste :) Without it it doesn't matter, nothing matters.
 

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 #2395 on: 03/10/2016 17:31:05 »
But you can't take the conscious observer away from it. To me we're like the universe observing itself. That doesn't state that the universe must disappear if we disappear though, although local consciousness following its arrow of time, does.
 

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 #2396 on: 03/10/2016 17:33:07 »
You might say that we're a necessary part of a SpaceTime, we guarantee its existence just by commenting on it.
 

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 #2397 on: 03/10/2016 17:44:39 »
In a way a mirror to the idea of predestination. A universe without consciousness will still exist, but who will know about it? And a predestined reality may offer you a illusion of choices made, as in the idea of many worlds, where you can be both beggar and king simultaneously (well, more or less 'simultaneously', a quagmire to define here too, as always) dead, and alive. Or will you assume that you dying in one world puts an end to all other worlds of 'you' too?

But as no choices are left for you in the underlying assumption of a 'reality' where all paths are taken, your free will no longer exist.
 

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 #2398 on: 03/10/2016 18:08:30 »
It's a quite interesting question actually.

In 'many worlds' your 'reality' bifurcates constantly, creating new 'universes' with every 'choice' you make. do those that you've created to the end of your life continue after your death then, or not? If you think it all falls apart you would be weighting reality, defining a priority to yourself, or what you think is 'yourself'. But giving a priority to just a part of that reality where all paths are taken and probability disappear is actually introducing probability again, isn't it? :) The probability of there only being one 'original you' that then also define the paths of every 'copy' you ever made, as soon as 'you' disappear.

Also, the idea of 'making choices' if all paths are there, does that really make sense to you? The alternative is then to assume that each one of us creates universes :) and that it all comes from a 'original' 'free will' of 'you'. eh, and 'me' too. eh yes, as well as 'you too' naturally .. ad bifurcation infinitum.

Create a bifurcating universe and you redefine probability to something already predestined. alternatively you introduce 'free will' as ones magic solution, but as probability still will be gone and with it uncertainty, as far as I can see?. where then will your equivalence be? You will be locked to redefine consciousness as the magic key to everything, and the moon must disappear for real as soon as you turn your head, and worst of all, you will still call it 'science' :)
 

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 #2399 on: 03/10/2016 18:30:22 »
Emergences.

They exist, and they take us by surprise.
I think intelligence is a emergence too.

Why do they exist?
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #2399 on: 03/10/2016 18:30:22 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length