Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #689172 > unrolled thread

Can quantum measurement be rejected ?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Can  quantum measurement be rejected ? will <willscranton@butchersboulevard.commypanprofile> - 2018-06-06 18:07 +0000
    Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 18:14 +0000
      Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? will <willscranton@butchersboulevard.commypanprofile> - 2018-06-06 22:38 +0000
        Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 17:43 -0700
          Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? will <willscranton@butchersboulevard.commypanprofile> - 2018-06-07 22:07 +0000
            Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 17:12 -0700
              Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? will <willscranton@butchersboulevard.commypanprofile> - 2018-06-08 14:49 +0000
        Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-06 22:39 -0400
          Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-06-07 05:19 +0200
            Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-07 05:31 -0400
              Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-06-07 12:01 +0200
                Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-07 16:32 -0400
                  Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? will <willscranton@butchersboulevard.commypanprofile> - 2018-06-07 21:58 +0000
                    Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 04:12 -0700
                      Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? will <willscranton@butchersboulevard.commypanprofile> - 2018-06-08 14:38 +0000
                  Re: Can quantum measurement be rejected ? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-06-08 02:41 +0200
    "Quantum Mechanics" has no cause and effect, just probabilities. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-06 11:47 -0700
      Re: "Quantum Mechanics" has no cause and effect, just probabilities. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 19:00 +0000
        We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-06 12:25 -0700
          Re: We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-06 16:35 -0400
            Re: We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-06 17:52 -0700
              Re: We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth. mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-06-06 18:15 -0700
              No truth, Nothing to aspire to ? Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-06 18:21 -0700
                Re: No truth, Nothing to aspire to ? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-06 22:47 -0400
                  NO TRUTH. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-06 20:28 -0700
                    Re: NO TRUTH. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-07 05:32 -0400
                      Harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ? Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-07 11:18 -0700
                        Re: Harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-07 16:42 -0400
                          Ben Jacoby takes _pride_ in his randomness, I don't. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-07 14:15 -0700
                            Re: Ben Jacoby takes _pride_ in his randomness, I don't. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-08 02:20 -0400
                              Worshiping Ignorance. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-07 23:36 -0700
                                Re: Worshiping Ignorance. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-08 11:42 -0400
                                  " I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer " -- Ben Jacoby. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-08 10:17 -0700
                                  Re: Worshiping Ignorance. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-09 01:58 +0000
                                    Re: Worshiping Ignorance. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-08 19:55 -0700
                                      Re: Worshiping Ignorance. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-09 21:37 +0000
                                        EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 14:51 -0700
                                          Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-06-09 22:01 +0000
                                            To a retard, _everything_ is "random". Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 15:11 -0700
                                            Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 15:13 -0700
                                            Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:52 -0700
                                          Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-09 22:54 +0000
                                            People are forever MisQuoting Einstein; I correct them. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 16:40 -0700
                                              Re: People are forever MisQuoting Einstein; I correct them. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-10 00:15 +0000
                                                Putting words in Einstein's mouth. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 17:42 -0700
                                                  Re: Putting words in Einstein's mouth. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-10 00:59 +0000
                                                    God Doesn't Play Dice, he's not an idiot; nor is he a "he". Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 18:28 -0700
                                                      Re: God Doesn't Play Dice, he's not an idiot; nor is he a "he". vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-10 01:42 +0000
                                                        Mark Twain was a determinist. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 20:16 -0700
                                                          Re: Mark Twain was a determinist. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-10 12:48 -0400
                                                            Quantum Mechanics is statistical, not complete. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-10 10:51 -0700
                                                              Re: Quantum Mechanics is statistical, not complete. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-11 11:02 -0400
                                                      Re: God Doesn't Play Dice, he's not an idiot; nor is he a "he". mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-06-09 19:37 -0700
                                                      Re: God Doesn't Play Dice, he's not an idiot; nor is he a "he". benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-09 22:59 -0400
                                                        Re: God Doesn't Play Dice, he's not an idiot; nor is he a "he". vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-10 03:51 +0000
                                                          Re: God Doesn't Play Dice, he's not an idiot; nor is he a "he". benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-10 12:50 -0400
                                                            Mark Twain, Einstein and Stephen Hawking are revered by nerds Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-10 11:01 -0700
                                                              Re: Mark Twain, Einstein and Stephen Hawking are revered by nerds benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-11 11:06 -0400
                                                    Re: Putting words in Einstein's mouth. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-11 07:02 -0500
                                          Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-09 22:28 -0400
                                        Re: Worshiping Ignorance. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 14:53 -0700
                                          Re: Worshiping Ignorance. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 16:41 -0700
                                    If the truth is your enemy... Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-09 00:14 -0700
                                    Re: Worshiping Ignorance. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-06-09 06:52 -0400
          Re: We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 21:22 +0000
            I feel rich, very rich. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-06-06 14:39 -0700
        Re: "Quantum Mechanics" has no cause and effect, just probabilities. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-06 16:32 -0400
      Re: "Quantum Mechanics" has no cause and effect, just probabilities. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-06 16:30 -0400

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#689262 — Re: We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth.

On 6/6/18 1:35 PM, benj wrote:
> On 6/6/2018 3:25 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> You ("Odd" [sic]) replied ( to me ):
>>>> "Quantum Mechanics" has no cause and effect, just probabilities;
>>>> it tells you the likelihood of something you might bet on,
>>>> like a poker game; the details, the real cause, is unknown.
>>>
>>> Cause and effect is fully supported in QM.
>>> I think you’re confusing determinism with causality.
>>
>> No, it's SemiRandom, like a poker game... place your bets.
>>
>> _Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
>> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
>> and we can't change what we prefer.
>>
>> We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth.
>> How and What we consume is what makes us different.
>>
> Rolf, your universe as a mechanical device theory is totally bogus.
> One may have a preference but even if it is predetermined you don't have 
> to follow it.

It may be predetermined that you will not.

Really, we cannot know... how would we even test the idea of 
pre-determination? We cannot know.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689268 — Re: We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth.

On Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 5:52:59 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote:
> On 6/6/18 1:35 PM, benj wrote:
> > On 6/6/2018 3:25 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> >> You ("Odd" [sic]) replied ( to me ):
> >>>> "Quantum Mechanics" has no cause and effect, just probabilities;
> >>>> it tells you the likelihood of something you might bet on,
> >>>> like a poker game; the details, the real cause, is unknown.
> >>>
> >>> Cause and effect is fully supported in QM.
> >>> I think you’re confusing determinism with causality.
> >>
> >> No, it's SemiRandom, like a poker game... place your bets.
> >>
> >> _Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
> >> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
> >> and we can't change what we prefer.
> >>
> >> We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth.
> >> How and What we consume is what makes us different.
> >>
> > Rolf, your universe as a mechanical device theory is totally bogus.
> > One may have a preference but even if it is predetermined you don't have 
> > to follow it.
> 
> It may be predetermined that you will not.
> 
> Really, we cannot know... how would we even test the idea of 
> pre-determination? We cannot know.
> 
> -- 
> Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
> cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
> somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
> 
> They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
> 
> <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

How does an atomic clock press the button to initiate
its measurement? Then how does it press the button to
end it? This makes that clocks measurement Quantum Mechanically
inexact.
Inbetween how is a vibration or radiation detected?

Mitchell Raemsch

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689270 — No truth, Nothing to aspire to ?

> how would we even test the idea of pre-determination ?  We cannot know.

All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells us:

  Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
  otherwise, there'd be no truth, nothing to aspire to.

_Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
and we can't change what we prefer.

General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal, 
perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.

We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth.
How and What we consume is what makes us different.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689277 — Re: No truth, Nothing to aspire to ?

On 6/6/2018 9:21 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> how would we even test the idea of pre-determination ?  We cannot know.
> 
> All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells us:
> 
>    Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
>    otherwise, there'd be no truth, nothing to aspire to.
> 
> _Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
> and we can't change what we prefer.
> 
> General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal,
> perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.
> 
> We assert useful premises, disregarding the truth.
> How and What we consume is what makes us different.
> 
And the way you know that everything is predetermined is?

There is NO way. You are just flapping your gums to give your religious 
opinion. I can say that tomorrow I will make a decision NOT 
predetermined by all previous experience (or some set mechanical future) 
and will choose the opposite of what I was inclined to do, and then you 
will say but even your idea to decide the opposite way was preordained 
by everything that happened to that point. So who is correct? Nobody can 
tell, which is why you are just selling your religious beliefs here and 
calling ti science.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689280 — NO TRUTH.

> tomorrow I will choose the opposite of what I was inclined to do,

Out of sheer ignorance, no doubt; still:

  All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells us:

    Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
    otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing to aspire to.

  _Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
  We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
  and we can't change what we prefer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689293 — Re: NO TRUTH.

On 6/6/2018 11:28 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> tomorrow I will choose the opposite of what I was inclined to do,
> 
> Out of sheer ignorance, no doubt; still:
> 
>    All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells us:
> 
>      Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
>      otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing to aspire to.
> 
>    _Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
>    We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
>    and we can't change what we prefer.
> 
Preach it, Rev! Preach it!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689330 — Harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ?

You (Ben) replied ( to me ):
> > Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
> > otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing to aspire to.
> 
> Preach it, Rev! Preach it!

And your "gospel" is what ?
harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689369 — Re: Harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ?

On 6/7/2018 2:18 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> You (Ben) replied ( to me ):
>>> Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
>>> otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing to aspire to.
>>
>> Preach it, Rev! Preach it!
> 
> And your "gospel" is what ?
> harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ?
> 
When we are talking science, Rolf, my religious beliefs are totally 
irrelevant as are yours. This is clearly a lesson you have never learned.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689377 — Ben Jacoby takes _pride_ in his randomness, I don't.

You (Ben) replied ( to me ):
> > And your "gospel" is what ?
> > harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ?
> 
> my religious beliefs are totally irrelevant

Truer words have never been spoken.

You take _pride_ in your randomness, I don't.
Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing to aspire to.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689431 — Re: Ben Jacoby takes _pride_ in his randomness, I don't.

On 6/7/2018 5:15 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> You (Ben) replied ( to me ):
>>> And your "gospel" is what ?
>>> harp playing, androgynous angels in the clouds ?
>>
>> my religious beliefs are totally irrelevant
> 
> Truer words have never been spoken.
> 
> You take _pride_ in your randomness, I don't.
> Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
> otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing to aspire to.
> 
Pride? Really?  Rolf you are still a moron!

If it's all a machine, why bother? Your religion is utter hopelessness!

It's you who have it wrong. IF there are no choices then there is 
CERTAINLY nothing to aspire to, no achievements to be made, no credit 
for accomplishment, nothing but death and confusion awaiting you.

Sad.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689435 — Worshiping Ignorance.

You (Ben) wrote:
> IF there are no choices then there is 
> CERTAINLY nothing to aspire to, no achievements to be made, 
> no credit for accomplishment, 
> nothing but death and confusion awaiting you.  Sad.

You worship ignorance.  How is that any better ?

We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
and we can't change what we prefer.

General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal, 
perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689482 — Re: Worshiping Ignorance.

On 6/8/2018 2:36 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> You (Ben) wrote:
>> IF there are no choices then there is
>> CERTAINLY nothing to aspire to, no achievements to be made,
>> no credit for accomplishment,
>> nothing but death and confusion awaiting you.  Sad.
> 
> You worship ignorance.  How is that any better ?

No Rolf, YOU are the one worshiping ignorance. I keep telling you that 
science is NOT religion but all you do is try to tell me what I 
"believe" and then repeat your own religious dogma over and over as if 
that proves something. Thumping your bible proves nothing.

> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
> and we can't change what we prefer.

And I say I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer. And you 
can't prove me wrong. All you can do is just stand their Screaming you 
are right like baby Nads.

> General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal,
> perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.

This is wrong from the very start, Rolf. Space-time is NOT static. It 
can't be static because it warps due to the presence of mass and because 
mass is not static neither can be space-time (to use that bogus theory).

And as for "eternal" You have NO way of knowing that. It is simply your 
religious belief. Now as for "causal" the theory certainly is causal. 
But that is no proof that EVERYTHING in the universe is causal. MUCH in 
the universe and in science is causal. It's what makes science work!

A "true" timescape, on the other hand, would be called "time-space" and 
it would consist of a hyper-dimensional matrix sometimes referred to as 
the "multiverses". It contains ALL acts it is possible to perpetrate in 
the universe. One could speculate such a timescape is static, eternal, 
and perfectly causal. But human experience is none of those things 
because it is produced by the passage of consciousness in a path through 
that multi-dimensional timescape. The kicker here is that when those 
paths are left to their own devices they coast forward according to 
Newton's laws. That is called the "most probable future", but there is 
an additional law which says that the path can be altered by a "force" 
which in this case is will. That deflects the most probable path and 
changes what one experiences as the "future".

You listening, Rolf? I didn't think so.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689492 — " I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer " -- Ben Jacoby.

You (Ben) wrote:
> I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer.

Please haul your brain down to the nearest mechanic, it's sprung a leak.

> > General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal,
> > perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.
> 
> This is wrong from the very start, Rolf.  Space-time is NOT static.

There is no Time dimension outside of (4-D) SpaceTime.

You can ( and do ) invent dimensions all day long,
-- for cuteness, gender, skin color, autism, etc.;
but none of them have anything to do with physical reality.

You (Ben) worship ignorance, a.k.a. the "multiverse".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689593 — Re: Worshiping Ignorance.

On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 11:42:49 -0400, benj wrote:

> On 6/8/2018 2:36 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> You (Ben) wrote:
>>> IF there are no choices then there is CERTAINLY nothing to aspire to,
>>> no achievements to be made,
>>> no credit for accomplishment,
>>> nothing but death and confusion awaiting you.  Sad.
>> 
>> You worship ignorance.  How is that any better ?
> 
> No Rolf, YOU are the one worshiping ignorance. I keep telling you that
> science is NOT religion but all you do is try to tell me what I
> "believe" and then repeat your own religious dogma over and over as if
> that proves something. Thumping your bible proves nothing.
> 
>> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
>> and we can't change what we prefer.
> 
> And I say I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer. And you
> can't prove me wrong. All you can do is just stand their Screaming you
> are right like baby Nads.
> 
>> General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal,
>> perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.
> 
> This is wrong from the very start, Rolf. Space-time is NOT static. It
> can't be static because it warps due to the presence of mass and because
> mass is not static neither can be space-time (to use that bogus theory).
> 
> And as for "eternal" You have NO way of knowing that. It is simply your
> religious belief. Now as for "causal" the theory certainly is causal.
> But that is no proof that EVERYTHING in the universe is causal. MUCH in
> the universe and in science is causal. It's what makes science work!
> 
> A "true" timescape, on the other hand, would be called "time-space" and
> it would consist of a hyper-dimensional matrix sometimes referred to as
> the "multiverses". It contains ALL acts it is possible to perpetrate in
> the universe. One could speculate such a timescape is static, eternal,
> and perfectly causal. But human experience is none of those things
> because it is produced by the passage of consciousness in a path through
> that multi-dimensional timescape. The kicker here is that when those
> paths are left to their own devices they coast forward according to
> Newton's laws. That is called the "most probable future", but there is
> an additional law which says that the path can be altered by a "force"
> which in this case is will. That deflects the most probable path and
> changes what one experiences as the "future".
> 
> You listening, Rolf? I didn't think so.

One way to deal with the "we don't have free will" folks is to believe 
them.

Therefore, Jeff is nothing more than a philosophical zombie -- and he 
doesn't even know it, because he doesn't know what it is like to be 
conscious with free will.

-- 
-v

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689596 — Re: Worshiping Ignorance.

On 6/8/18 6:58 PM, vallor wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 11:42:49 -0400, benj wrote:
> 
>> On 6/8/2018 2:36 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>> You (Ben) wrote:
>>>> IF there are no choices then there is CERTAINLY nothing to aspire to,
>>>> no achievements to be made,
>>>> no credit for accomplishment,
>>>> nothing but death and confusion awaiting you.  Sad.
>>>
>>> You worship ignorance.  How is that any better ?
>>
>> No Rolf, YOU are the one worshiping ignorance. I keep telling you that
>> science is NOT religion but all you do is try to tell me what I
>> "believe" and then repeat your own religious dogma over and over as if
>> that proves something. Thumping your bible proves nothing.
>>
>>> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
>>> and we can't change what we prefer.
>>
>> And I say I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer. And you
>> can't prove me wrong. All you can do is just stand their Screaming you
>> are right like baby Nads.
>>
>>> General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal,
>>> perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.
>>
>> This is wrong from the very start, Rolf. Space-time is NOT static. It
>> can't be static because it warps due to the presence of mass and because
>> mass is not static neither can be space-time (to use that bogus theory).
>>
>> And as for "eternal" You have NO way of knowing that. It is simply your
>> religious belief. Now as for "causal" the theory certainly is causal.
>> But that is no proof that EVERYTHING in the universe is causal. MUCH in
>> the universe and in science is causal. It's what makes science work!
>>
>> A "true" timescape, on the other hand, would be called "time-space" and
>> it would consist of a hyper-dimensional matrix sometimes referred to as
>> the "multiverses". It contains ALL acts it is possible to perpetrate in
>> the universe. One could speculate such a timescape is static, eternal,
>> and perfectly causal. But human experience is none of those things
>> because it is produced by the passage of consciousness in a path through
>> that multi-dimensional timescape. The kicker here is that when those
>> paths are left to their own devices they coast forward according to
>> Newton's laws. That is called the "most probable future", but there is
>> an additional law which says that the path can be altered by a "force"
>> which in this case is will. That deflects the most probable path and
>> changes what one experiences as the "future".
>>
>> You listening, Rolf? I didn't think so.
> 
> One way to deal with the "we don't have free will" folks is to believe
> them.
> 
> Therefore, Jeff is nothing more than a philosophical zombie -- and he
> doesn't even know it, because he doesn't know what it is like to be
> conscious with free will.
> 

How do you know if you have free will?


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689728 — Re: Worshiping Ignorance.

On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 19:55:56 -0700, Snit wrote:

> On 6/8/18 6:58 PM, vallor wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 11:42:49 -0400, benj wrote:
>> 
>>> On 6/8/2018 2:36 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>>> You (Ben) wrote:
>>>>> IF there are no choices then there is CERTAINLY nothing to aspire
>>>>> to,
>>>>> no achievements to be made,
>>>>> no credit for accomplishment,
>>>>> nothing but death and confusion awaiting you.  Sad.
>>>>
>>>> You worship ignorance.  How is that any better ?
>>>
>>> No Rolf, YOU are the one worshiping ignorance. I keep telling you that
>>> science is NOT religion but all you do is try to tell me what I
>>> "believe" and then repeat your own religious dogma over and over as if
>>> that proves something. Thumping your bible proves nothing.
>>>
>>>> We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
>>>> and we can't change what we prefer.
>>>
>>> And I say I can choose to do the opposite of what I prefer. And you
>>> can't prove me wrong. All you can do is just stand their Screaming you
>>> are right like baby Nads.
>>>
>>>> General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal,
>>>> perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.
>>>
>>> This is wrong from the very start, Rolf. Space-time is NOT static. It
>>> can't be static because it warps due to the presence of mass and
>>> because mass is not static neither can be space-time (to use that
>>> bogus theory).
>>>
>>> And as for "eternal" You have NO way of knowing that. It is simply
>>> your religious belief. Now as for "causal" the theory certainly is
>>> causal. But that is no proof that EVERYTHING in the universe is
>>> causal. MUCH in the universe and in science is causal. It's what makes
>>> science work!
>>>
>>> A "true" timescape, on the other hand, would be called "time-space"
>>> and it would consist of a hyper-dimensional matrix sometimes referred
>>> to as the "multiverses". It contains ALL acts it is possible to
>>> perpetrate in the universe. One could speculate such a timescape is
>>> static, eternal, and perfectly causal. But human experience is none of
>>> those things because it is produced by the passage of consciousness in
>>> a path through that multi-dimensional timescape. The kicker here is
>>> that when those paths are left to their own devices they coast forward
>>> according to Newton's laws. That is called the "most probable future",
>>> but there is an additional law which says that the path can be altered
>>> by a "force" which in this case is will. That deflects the most
>>> probable path and changes what one experiences as the "future".
>>>
>>> You listening, Rolf? I didn't think so.
>> 
>> One way to deal with the "we don't have free will" folks is to believe
>> them.
>> 
>> Therefore, Jeff is nothing more than a philosophical zombie -- and he
>> doesn't even know it, because he doesn't know what it is like to be
>> conscious with free will.
>> 
>> 
> How do you know if you have free will?

If you have to ask that question, then you don't have it.

I would leave it at that, but perhaps you are making a serious inquiry.  
In that case, I suggest you consider points made by some modern 
philosophers.

This is very much wrapped up in the "hard" problem of consciousness, and 
without an appreciation of that, you can find yourself stuck in long-
refuted 19th century determinism.

One point is that the universe has already demonstrated it has non-
deterministic processes, so there is the very real possibility that 
consciousness is also non-deterministic.

Another one is that if free will is an illusion[*], it's very hard to 
shake off.

If these ideas truly interest you, I suggest watching Dr. Searle's Google 
talk, found here:

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCyKNtocdZE

Good luck, and may the force be with you.

-- 
-v
[*] This is, of course, assuming you experience free will.  If you don't 
experience your will as being free, then you belong in Jeff's category.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689746 — EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope.

Scott replied ( to Mike ):
> > How do you know if you have free will ?
> 
> This is very much wrapped up in the "hard" problem of consciousness, 
> and without an appreciation of that, you can find yourself stuck in
> long-refuted 19th century determinism.

"refuted" by whom, the Pope ?

Everyone avoids the truth, to some extent;
we assert _useful_ premises, irregardless of the truth;
hence ego, online gaming and religion.

Einstein, on the other hand, loved the truth, more than most.
To his death, he kept telling us: free will is an illusion.

> One point is that the universe has already demonstrated it has non-
> deterministic processes, so there is the very real possibility that 
> consciousness is also non-deterministic.

All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells me ( not you ):

  Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
  otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing for me to aspire to.

> If you don't experience your will as being free, 
> then you belong in [ EINSTEIN's ] category [ far from the Pope ].

_Everyone_ is enslaved, there is no free will.
We simply prefer the LeastBad "option",
and we can't change what we prefer.

How and What we consume is what makes us different.

At the start, there was no entropy, just infinite eXergy/density. 
[ eXergy is a type of energy that can do physical work, force * distance ]
And, because " Time == Entropy ", there was no time on the clock then.

Eventually, this eXergy will be consumed away, replaced with entropy;
leaving us with a uniform heat bath that has all of the energy
but none of the eXergy.  Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was.

General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal, 
perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689753 — Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope.

On 2018-06-09, Jeff-Relf.Me  @. <Jeff-Relf.Me@> wrote:
> Scott replied ( to Mike ):
>> > How do you know if you have free will ?
>> 
>> This is very much wrapped up in the "hard" problem of consciousness, 
>> and without an appreciation of that, you can find yourself stuck in
>> long-refuted 19th century determinism.
>
> "refuted" by whom, the Pope ?
>
> Everyone avoids the truth, to some extent;
> we assert _useful_ premises, irregardless of the truth;
> hence ego, online gaming and religion.
>
> Einstein, on the other hand, loved the truth, more than most.
> To his death, he kept telling us: free will is an illusion.

I remember one study they tried to predict direction of fly, they
couldn't. Even fly is unpredictable.

-- 
press any key to continue or any other to quit...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689763 — To a retard, _everything_ is "random".

You (Branimir) replied ( to me ):
> > Everyone avoids the truth, to some extent;
> > we assert _useful_ premises, irregardless of the truth;
> > hence ego, online gaming and religion.
> >
> > Einstein, on the other hand, loved the truth, more than most.
> > To his death, he kept telling us: free will is an illusion.
> 
> I remember one study they tried to predict direction of a fly,
> they couldn't.  Even flies are [ SemiRandom ].

To a retard, _everything_ is "random".

All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells _me_ ( not you ):

  Randomness is ignorance, nothing more;
  otherwise, there'd be NO TRUTH, nothing for me to aspire to.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689765 — Re: EINSTEIN's category, far from the Pope.

On 6/9/18 3:01 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On 2018-06-09, Jeff-Relf.Me  @. <Jeff-Relf.Me@> wrote:
>> Scott replied ( to Mike ):
>>>> How do you know if you have free will ?
>>>
>>> This is very much wrapped up in the "hard" problem of consciousness,
>>> and without an appreciation of that, you can find yourself stuck in
>>> long-refuted 19th century determinism.
>>
>> "refuted" by whom, the Pope ?
>>
>> Everyone avoids the truth, to some extent;
>> we assert _useful_ premises, irregardless of the truth;
>> hence ego, online gaming and religion.
>>
>> Einstein, on the other hand, loved the truth, more than most.
>> To his death, he kept telling us: free will is an illusion.
> 
> I remember one study they tried to predict direction of fly, they
> couldn't. Even fly is unpredictable.
> 
Unable to be predicted is not the same as random.

I share the intuition that there is no randomness... but I absolutely 
agree it is merely an intuition and unsupportable.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web