User Controls
The mind is a meat radio.
-
2017-02-10 at 5:29 PM UTCMake a lol triangle
-
2017-02-23 at 8:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon As I said, there is a reason why the Copenhagen interpretation is simply how we do QM in the modern day; it works.
I looked up a list of other interpretations. One of these, sometimes referred to as the "Many Worlds" interpretation, appears to be compatible with determinism. While I have been looking for layman explanations of this stuff, I have not found any information that argues that the Copenhagen interpretation is better or makes more sense than the Many Worlds interpretation. Interestingly, I have found information suggesting the opposite.
I was wondering if you had any information regarding that you could share with me. Or better yet, if you could explain why you think the Copenhagen interpretation should be preferable over the Many Worlds interpretation. -
2017-02-23 at 9:26 PM UTC
Originally posted by Open Your Mind I looked up a list of other interpretations. One of these, sometimes referred to as the "Many Worlds" interpretation, appears to be compatible with determinism. While I have been looking for layman explanations of this stuff, I have not found any information that argues that the Copenhagen interpretation is better or makes more sense than the Many Worlds interpretation. Interestingly, I have found information suggesting the opposite.
I was wondering if you had any information regarding that you could share with me. Or better yet, if you could explain why you think the Copenhagen interpretation should be preferable over the Many Worlds interpretation.
The Copenhagen interpretation is the most complete interpretation of QM that requires the least amount of unfounded assumptions, which complies with experimental evidence. What it claims is simple; by some mechanism, unknown to us, the universe exists and what it does at the quantum scale is determined at the time when a quantum event actually takes place, not before. This lines up with experiment and requires no fanciful explanations of alternate timelines etc.
In a nutshell, the Many Worlds interpretation basically asserts that is no point at which a particle has to choose which state it's in; the particle is in both states, both happen and both continue. So as an example, if Obbe is taking a measurement of a quantum event that is (seemingly) randomly determined, he will find the result to be A as well as B, but at the point of measurement boath realities become true. This can theoretically be true and be deterministic and not violate the inequality because there will always be an equal number of all measurements; Bell's inequality is not violated "in universe" (across all timelines) even if it might be in a specific timeline, therefore as far as the universe at large, inclusive of all "worlds" goes, there can in fact be a hidden local variable.
You can already see that this is spiraling into a realm of unfalsifiable, untestable claims with tonnes of assumptions and non-explanations. We obviously cannot ever test for this, seeing as we would simply occupy one of these timelines and our tests in a specific timeline would indicate what is asserted by the Copenhagen interpretation, even if "in reality" (lol) the MWI is true. See how convenient that is?
To be perfectly honest with you, the reality is that in actual scientific practice, the interpretation doesn't matter. What scientists care about is what you can test. They are just that, interpretations, sort of like opinions, it's basically whatever fiction you can come up with that doesn't contradict experiment. The Copenhagen interpretation simply contextualizes what we have observed and what is consistent with the mathematics of the situation. It's the defacto "right answer" because it neatly says that basically, we don't know why wavefunction collapse works out that way it does, but here's what we can observe, XYZ. Other interpretations, including Many Worlds for example, would need some kind of further support beyond our existing QM models, but none exist. So the Copenhagen interpretation is the only one we have any reason to really give a shit about until such a time where one of these other explanations nut up and give us actual evidence.
Post last edited by Captain Falcon at 2017-02-23T21:30:15.166717+00:00 -
2017-02-24 at 5:30 AM UTC
Originally posted by a·nom·a·ly I have heard this a fair amount recently. I dont think I agree with it but I see it as a practical metaphor on a number of levels. It first implores one to consider what "frequency they tune themselves to. More importantly after that examination they may then consider methods of tuning that frequency. I think some will be lead to wonder what frequencies are trying to tune into them.
This is how schizophrenia starts.
the mind runs between 6-30hrtz. only recently has digital technology (or so they say) and the mapping of thought patterns to thoughts in the form of text or text read audio has made it possible for people to read your minds from their phone display sitting next to you (or behind you if you drive for rideshare)
I think some german company mastered this with the aid of IBM. I still think it existed decades ago. they're just conditioning us today with all of this tech shit while cashing in on their research -
2017-02-24 at 5:37 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon To be perfectly honest with you, the reality is that in actual scientific practice, the interpretation doesn't matter.
Post last edited by Captain Falcon at 2017-02-23T21:30:15.166717+00:00
Time is not linear. there are believed to be multiple dimensions that truly do exist. grooves in a track. -
2017-02-24 at 5:38 AM UTC
-
2017-02-26 at 11:29 PM UTC
-
2017-02-26 at 11:59 PM UTC
-
2017-02-27 at 12:27 AM UTC
Originally posted by Totse 2001 And there is no evidence not to suggest this. the burden is on you.
You need no evidence not to suggest something. To not suggest something is to make no claim. You are making a claim and need to back it up with evidence (or don't, and I'll call you a retard and we'll move on).
-
2017-02-27 at 1:19 AM UTCRETARD!
-
2017-02-27 at 3:10 AM UTC
-
2017-04-05 at 12:07 AM UTC
-
2017-04-05 at 12:07 AM UTC
-
2017-04-18 at 4:11 AM UTC
-
2017-04-18 at 1:02 PM UTCIs time linear? we live in ages. how does one truly constitute evidence if it's only theory as a whole or part of? it's a construct of how we perceive progression from that of memories.
-
2017-04-18 at 1:27 PM UTCI'm not convinced the brain is a meat radio. In a radio device, the em wave is there by design. The em field from our brains might just be a by product, and is likely not the method of operation.
Post last edited by Ghost Prototype at 2017-04-18T17:47:04.872531+00:00 -
2017-04-18 at 1:31 PM UTC
Originally posted by Ghost Prototype I'm not convinced the brain is a meat radio. In a radio device, the em wave is there by design. The em field from our brains might just be a by product, and is likely not the method of operation.
I think so too, it's a byproduct of electrophysiology. More importantly, the brain is more like a meat computer, or as i like to call it "The Unfixable Thought Machine" -
2017-04-18 at 1:46 PM UTCregardless of being a byproduct it still might be the original blueprints of radio devices. and they have already mapped out human thought and can sit behind you in a car or at a bus stop and read everything you say like Dragon Speak. it just comes up like CC on their cell phones monitor.
the MOON PERSONs are the rulers these days.. not the elders. and that's where their arrogance of fixing what we left them behind is going to be demise of society as a whole.
fuck you depression -
2017-04-18 at 1:57 PM UTC
Originally posted by Totse 2001 regardless of being a byproduct it still might be the original blueprints of radio devices.
Radio was developed and understood like a century ago, while theories of EM consciousness are very new.and they have already mapped out human thought
[Citation needed]and can sit behind you in a car or at a bus stop
Scary o.Oand read everything you say like Dragon Speak. it just comes up like CC on their cell phones monitor.
Likely by bouncing a laser off a window or other nearby surface, and converting the vibrations in the material to audio / using an audio to text program.the MOON PERSONs are the rulers these days.. not the elders. and that's where their arrogance of fixing what we left them behind is going to be demise of society as a whole.
We don't own this place yet. How will fixing a broken world be the demise of society?fuck you depression
Qft
Post last edited by Ghost Prototype at 2017-04-18T17:47:16.207165+00:00 -
2017-04-18 at 4:52 PM UTCmore like arduino.
