|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, Steven Keyl wrote: Good article. Thanks, Steve! |
|||||||||
Steven Keyl Inner circle Washington, D.C. 2630 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote: The only people I've spoken to about this that respond this way are ones that haven't bothered to actually understand the hypothesis. Maybe you're different in that regard, maybe not. I understand it certainly sounds ridiculous on its face, but so did a lot of things until they didn't. For me, the compelling arguments are both scientific and philosophical. The science as outlined in the video is incontrovertible. The conclusions to be drawn from that science, however, are where the disagreements arise. It was my hope to actually discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of the actual theory, instead of having people weigh in without even having watched the video, and basing their conclusion on the title of said video. Lesson learned.
Steven Keyl - The Human Whisperer!
B2B Magazine Test! Best impromptu progressive Ace Assembly ever! "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." --Mark Twain |
|||||||||
Steven Keyl Inner circle Washington, D.C. 2630 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, stoneunhinged wrote: Great info there! Restating the nature of the debate is a good idea and I think you summed it up very well. Personally, Idealism is something that I'm still on the fence about, but there are increasingly compelling arguments. Regarding the two-slit experiment from the video, there have been subsequent findings that strongly bolster the idea that consciousness itself (as opposed to just observation) can have an effect in the material world. There was an experiment from 2012 that details the science behind how this happens. Apologies for yet another lengthy video (> 40 minutes) but these types of ideas don't lend themselves to sound bites, particularly if you want to get into the meat of the ideas. These ideas are also a veritable gold mine for mentalists looking for an interesting premise.
Steven Keyl - The Human Whisperer!
B2B Magazine Test! Best impromptu progressive Ace Assembly ever! "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." --Mark Twain |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, Steven Keyl wrote: Many years ago I attended a risk management conference at a hotel in Downtown Disney, in Anaheim, CA. In general, the conference went well, but, as you can imagine, there were a few odd glitches here and there. After the conference, several of the presenters (including yours truly) were sitting about, having beers, and chatting about things. The gentleman who organized the conference, Chuck by name, a friend of mine, joined us. "Well, we have quite a few lessons learned from this conference," said Chuck. I replied, "No. We have a lot of lessons. When the next conference takes place, and we don't make the same mistakes we made today, then, and only then, can we call them lessons learned." Chuck agreed. |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote: For the record, I rarely go by "Bilk". "Bill" is far more common. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts |
After losing our Cubs/Dodgers bet I prefer Bilk at times.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
rockwall Special user 762 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, S2000magician wrote: Once a rocket scientist, always a rocket scientist. That's what I always say! |
|||||||||
Steven Keyl Inner circle Washington, D.C. 2630 Posts |
Bill, if you haven't watched it, I'd love to actually hear your thoughts on the video.
I'm not expecting to change your mind, but I'd love to hear your take on it. If nothing else, I'd like to hear WHY you think it's crap.
Steven Keyl - The Human Whisperer!
B2B Magazine Test! Best impromptu progressive Ace Assembly ever! "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." --Mark Twain |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts |
This seems more about palatable narratives than whether the experimental data resemble what quantum mechanics offers as predictions.
To address the Einstein/Schrodinger question and going directly back to the guys who invented this stuff: Does curiosity kill the cat? (whose) Stephensen wrote a nice novel (Rise and Fall of D. O. D. O.) using conscious awareness vs uncertainty as magic. A while back Greg Egan wrote "Quarantine" about the larger effects of awareness on things. Stross picked up that notion and has been toying with it in his laundry stories. How many dimensions? What's already there? Meanwhile in the messy aggregated narrative we share... we are facing the question in other guise these days. Here in plaintext: "Do you really want your narrative subsumed by other?" I may have once thought but then I found Landru, or Landru found me... it was so long ago that it does not matter. ???
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2018, stoneunhinged wrote: From what little I've read - Hegel was not a fan of Newton. Which puts our discussion of position, momentum, ... atoms and photons on a difficult ground. Working from the subjective: "Your model is a synthesis of ..." looks agreeable.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Here's as far as I got:
Around 8:20 the narrator says that the fact that matter and energy (which are, of course, the same thing) are quantized better fits the idea that we're in a simulation (than, I suppose, that we're not). Certainly if we're in a simulation everything would be quantized, but that in no way suggests that the converse is true, or even that the converse is more likely than its negation. Around 9:10 the narrator says that nature is composed of quantized bits, which means that the universe has a finite number of components. How does it follow that if nature is quantized, the number of bits must necessarily be finite? I can imagine an infinite universe; why can't these scientists. I pretty much lost interest after that. The reasoning's shoddy (at least, as it's presented in that video). |
|||||||||
Steven Keyl Inner circle Washington, D.C. 2630 Posts |
Thanks, Bill! I appreciate you giving it a go.
Quote:
Does curiosity kill the cat? Now that's funny! Erwin would be proud.
Steven Keyl - The Human Whisperer!
B2B Magazine Test! Best impromptu progressive Ace Assembly ever! "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." --Mark Twain |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 18, 2018, Steven Keyl wrote: My pleasure, Steven. For whatever it's worth, I was expecting something of that nature (i.e., shoddy reasoning). In Metamagical Themas, Hofstadter wrote that in particle physics it used to be considered bold to posit the existence of a single, new, subatomic particle. What caused him to leave the study of particle physics was an article he read in which the author not only posited the existence of more than one new particle (27, to be precise), but several entire new classes of subatomic particles. The reason: to try to explain some trivial differences between measured results and theoretical results in some physics experiments. Apparently the author felt no shame in doing so. He should have. When scientists stop feeling shame, science suffers for it. Bold new theories should be cause for celebration, but they have to be well reasoned. (I, for one, cannot imagine what it must have been like for Georg Cantor when he sprang the idea of different sizes of infinity on the mathematical establishment, but you can be <blessed> sure that he made certain that his reasoning was bulletproof before he did so.) Anything less deserves whatever vituperation it engenders. |
|||||||||
Steven Keyl Inner circle Washington, D.C. 2630 Posts |
Bill, I personally don't find the reasoning shoddy at all. To me, those early bits you mentioned are simply setting the stage for the more compelling evidence to follow.
Quote:
Around 9:10 the narrator says that nature is composed of quantized bits, which means that the universe has a finite number of components. My takeaway is that because nature is composed of quantized bits, one cannot rule out the possibility of a finite universe. While an infinite universe may be imaginable, given physicist's current obsession with dark matter, the general consensus (with which I agree) is that the universe is indeed finite. For me, the more interesting bits come later (such as quantum entanglement), but unfortunately, it doesn't seem we'll be in a position to discuss them. Again, though I wish we could have gotten to some of the meatier ideas, I certainly appreciate your time investment.
Steven Keyl - The Human Whisperer!
B2B Magazine Test! Best impromptu progressive Ace Assembly ever! "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." --Mark Twain |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 18, 2018, Steven Keyl wrote: I may give it another go later. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on where you sit), I'm quite busy with work these days, so I haven't much time for these extracurriculars. |
|||||||||
Pop Haydn Inner circle Los Angeles 3691 Posts |
How does "Creation" differ fundamentally from "Simulation?"
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts |
To be in a simulation, some entity must have created it. I think so at least.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Steven Keyl Inner circle Washington, D.C. 2630 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 23, 2018, Pop Haydn wrote: I think you're right that they are functionally the same thing. The only distinction I would draw is that in the West, creation is entwined with our concept of God. By definition, God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. The designers of a simulation may be intelligent and highly advanced without necessarily having any of these traits normally attributed to God.
Steven Keyl - The Human Whisperer!
B2B Magazine Test! Best impromptu progressive Ace Assembly ever! "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." --Mark Twain |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 24, 2018, Steven Keyl wrote: But with respect to the simulation, they would have all of those traits, no? |
|||||||||
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 24, 2018, S2000magician wrote: No. The programmer would be god-like in setting up the program, but wouldn't necessarily know all of the outcomes in advance. Think of it as some kind of debugging program being run by an extremely sophisticated programmer. Sim City 1,000,000,000,001. But all of these scenarios involve way too much human suffering for my taste. A programmer who watches children starving and being abused would be a little bit twisted to not stop the program and do a little bit more tweaking to keep the children from suffering. But that's just me. I'm spongy and weak. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Are we living inside of a simulation? (9 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |