Every once in awhile, i’ll reignite my interest in Quantum Mechanics and Try to find a really clear Article or Book that Explains / Describes some or all of The Principle Experiments,
And Not Just ( Merely States ) The Results, Conclusions &/or Their Interpretation.
This last Round yielded what may be The Best ( But Still Deeply Flawed ) Description of Bell’s Inequality Experiment.
And it seems completely Bogus to me.
Why would All of The Worlds Physicists allow themselves to become so thoroughly confused by this Experiment?
Could you Clear a Few Things Up :
Also: If you do Offer an Explanations;
Please :
Do Not call me a Moron and Refer me to ANY Grade School Science Text Book.
Use Mathematical Formulas to Express An Idea that should be a Physical Description of Actual Particles, Not ‘Theoretical’ Particles.
- i don’t believe that Mathematics have anything to do with Physical Reality, which may be a Major Cause of much of This Confusion. Many Physicists apparently believe that there is a 1:1 Correspondence with Any, Absolutely Any, Mathematical Demonstration, Graph or Proof, with The Physical Universe.
- On The Most Elemental Level, Mathematics are A ‘Creation’ of The Human Mind, And Digitally Accurate to ( x degree ), While The Physical Universe ( If we are not living in a Matrix Construct created by Evil Robots or Spiritual Alien Daemons ) is Real, with Infinite Precision, While All Particles are Interacting with All ( ? ) Other Particles via Electromagnetic & Gravitational Fields. There is No Comparison.
- Mathematical ‘Expressions’ may be minimally useful in determining The Capacitance of a Simple Electronic Circuit, But all Predictions or Measurements of Reality are Deeply Flawed.
i Further Believe that Any Genuine ‘Idea’ that is Clearly Understood at a Fundimental Level,
May ( Should or Could ) be Expressed in Simple Language,
( Compartmentalized & Hierarchically Arranged )
So that it may be Easily Understood by An Attentive 5th Grader.
- If you are unable to Express your ‘Understanding’ of These Concepts In this Manner,
Please Refrain from Offering Assistance here.
- - -
By What Mechanism does The Experimental Apparatus Originally Produce Two Photons ( or Electrons ( or x ) ) that The Experimenter Believes are ‘Entangled’ ?
By What Mechanism ...
( e.g. : Fully Describe The Process so That An Attentive 5th Grader
could Recreate The Experiment if They had all The Requisite Materials )
… Could you Even Arrange this So that you could be reasonably sure that The Two Allegedly ‘Paired’ Atomic Particles would be Isolated, Routed and Then Measured, Excluding All Possibility of them Being Lost or Extraneous Particles Entering The Device and Becoming Confused with The Desired Particle(s.
It’s my understanding that when a Photon passes through any Physical Material;
Such as Air, Glass, A Mirror or Beam Splitter or Any Length of Optical Tubing; The Photon Interacts with Countless ( Literally Countless ) Electrons, Being Absorbed and Emitted in A Random Direction, Such that; Why would any Experimenter Believe that The Photon Reaching The Measuring Device, Would in Any way have any Relation to The Source Photon?
If The Experiment were Reproduced with ‘Classical’ Particles; Such as Billiard Balls, with Unambiguous & Consistent Properties from Their Creation Until Their Demise;
How would such a Duplicate Experiment Differ from The Quantum Particle Experiment?
One Description that i was Reading a few days ago suggested that The Two Photons The are Allegedly ‘Entangled’, will each Express Some ‘Mirrored’ Property that when Eventually ‘Measured’. Such as ( x-Spin ), One being this way, and other being that way. ( ? )
First of all : What is Spin, And how is it Actually, Physically Measured?
Then: The ‘Problem’ ( The Source of The ‘Spooky Action at A Distance’ ) is That if you Measure The x-Spin ( or Polarity ) of Particle ( A ), The x-Spin of Particle ( B )will Always be The Opposite; Which Suggests Very Strongly That they Always had That Property for Each to Begin with,
But The Confusion seems to Develop from A Second Measurement of Particle ( B’s ) y-Spin, With The Question; How can The Particle ‘Know’ that you are now Measuring The y-Spin.
So what? ( ! )
The Result of The y-Spin Measurement is going to be Completely Unknown Anyway…?
Why do Physicists believe that Atomic Particles do NOT have Inherent Properties?
What is The Experiment that leads them to believe this?
Why is Heisenberg’s ‘Uncertainty’ Principle so Thoroughly & Completely Misunderstood !
It’s simply stating that if you shine a light on something, It’s going to get a tiny bit warmer, and determining what The objects original temperature was, or is, slightly confused.
Why would anyone derive from this that The Particles themselves are Confused?
i’m also very annoyed that while ‘Scientists’ routine disregard mountains of Actual Evidence presented by Thousands of Casual Observers and callously poo-poo such phenomena,
They Routinely make up all sorts of crazy things like String Theory, Dark Matter & Energy, Worm Holes & such; And Sell them As Absolute Scientific Facts, With Absolutely NO Evidence for Them at All.
It is Very Exasperating.
Science is A Religion. There is No Doubt to That.
The Most Simple & Obvious Evidence for this is that Every 50 years, or so,
Everything ( 98% ) that was Believed by ‘Scientists’ Then, is Thrown out and Replaced with New Nonsense.
Considering that there has been No Substantial Advancements in Any Understanding
( Make Believe or Observed ) of The Physical Universe for more than 50 years,
This time Scale may be slightly skewered.
10 years from Now;
People will consider Einstein The Same way we now Consider Freud.
Another thing that very much annoys me is E=MC^2.
Why would The Speed of Light be used as a Multiple here? ( !! ) !
And then Squared ( ! )
What !
If you just go through The ‘Supposed’ Atomic Process of What Uranium Atoms do during a A-Bomb Reaction; The Atoms Break Apart, New Atoms are Formed, Some Neutrons are Released, And Some Peripheral Particles are let loose.
Everything that was there at The Beginning of The Process,
Is Accounted for At The End of The Process.
Which Matter was Converted to Energy?
Where did all The New Energy Come from?
It came from The Same Place that A Bowling Ball Hitting your Head when it Falls off a high Shelf. Everything has stored Energy in it. The Process by Which Uranium was Created tended to Store a LOT of Energy. When you Break it apart, That Energy is Released.
Is is possible to break apart Neutrons releasing their ‘Inherent’ Energy?
Yeah, Sure, Why not.
Is that Turning Matter into Energy?
No.
Keep in mind as well that All These ‘Models’ of Atoms & Protons & Electrons & such,
Are Schematical Doodles that let Human Minds grab onto when we’re trying to understand how they interact.
These ‘Atoms’ that we describe are Not ‘Real Atoms’.
The Spoken Dao is Not The Eternal Dao. ( Lao Tzu )
The Schematical Atom is Not The Real Atom. ( Benie Einstein )
There is Tremendous Confusion Brought about when you use An Analogy or Simile to Understand some Unknown Phenomena.
There is a Incomprehensible Tendency of many otherwise bright people to believe that once you Start thinking of ( A ) to be Very much like ( B ), All The Attributes of ( A ) are represented in ( B ).
That is Crazy Talk.
One of The Craziest Bits of Crazy Talk is Thinking of Photons or Other Atomic Particles as ‘Waves’. The only kinds of ‘Waves’ that we’re Sensorily Familiar with, Are Water or Sound Waves, And they are Manifest in Two Distinct Mediums, The Volume that Envelopes A Congregate of Many, Many Tiny Particles & The Form of These Particles in Motion.
Photons & Electrons are Well Understood to be Singular Particles.
If they do Express Another Kind of ‘Very Mysterious’ Property or Effect,
It is very Confusing ( Prone to Create Confusion ) by labeling this other Property with An Effect that has no Relevant Corresponding Attributes.
This other Property has to be ( Needs to be ) Understood from Whole Cloth.
And until then; It should just be set aside.
The World is Full of Incomprehensible Things,
A True Epistemologist is Able to Just Set Things Aside for awhile;
While The Religious Scientists, Priests & Insecure Parents feel compelled to provide Authoritative Explanations for Things that they don’t even being to understand.
Friday, September 09, 2011
Stock Market Rant
i am very skeptical of The Stock Market.
- - - : o
If i were king of The World,
i would outlaw it immediately; and restructure a new mechanism for funding new businesses & such.
It makes all The Sense in The World for you to Invest in Your Neighbor’s New Idea for a Perpetual Motion Machine, but once S’he sells enough units to start turning a profit, S’he should buy back all The Stock you bought, and reinstate unambiguous control of The Company.
- - - : o
i can not understand why Huge Corporations still have stock floating around amoung The Damp Masses.
It might make sense for The Employees of The Company to Own Part of The Company,
But that should be Automatic, without going through The Motions of Choosing to Buy into The Company. Every Employee by The Fact that they are An Employee is A ’Natural’ Investor in The Company.
- - - : o
But i digress.
What most annoys me is ‘Stock Market Players’ buy & sell, sell & buy stock all day, Occasionally ‘Making’ or ‘Earning’ huge dividends.
Granted; Even amoung The Players that are any good at this,
Aren’t very good at this.
But in Theory; When A Stock Market Investor Wins The Jackpot—
What have they contributed To The Gross National Product?
What Product or Service have they Added to The Economy?
- - - : o
Obviously : Nothing.
So where does their new income come from?
It comes from The Other Poor Bastards that Thought that they were going to hit The Jackpot, but got cold feet, Panicked when their stock fluctuated, or Ran when they thought that they heard some pots & pans falling in The Apartment next door.
The Stock Market is Purely A Lottery, In which The Cool & Staid sit patiently and follow The One & Only Rule to Win in The Stock Market.
Newer Sell your Stock when it’s lower than when you bought it.
Also:
When everyone else is Selling, You Buy.
When everyone else is Buying, You Sell.
It’s quite amazing that so few ‘Investors’ understand these rules.
- - - : o
But i digress.
What really brought me to The Rant File today is An Idea for —
A Wonderfully Simple Experiment.
Feed The Business News Programs Completely Random Stock Figures.
That is; if Bell Telephone is Selling today for $42 a share,
Your Computer program creates a Random Number to it’s Value so that The Business Analysts will think it’s selling for $12 a Share.
It might just as easily been assigned $239 a Share.
My prediction is that The Analysts won’t suspect The Slightest Shenanigans are Being Poured on them, As they are well aware that The Stock Market Fluctuates Wildly from Day to Day, and Will further Rationalize how these Values are Fitting Perfectly with The Daily News.
What is more; The Winners & Losers in The Stock Market will blithely Trade on these bogus figures, buying & selling with The Same Enthusiasm & Trepidation as they Always have, and No Noticeable Effect will incur upon their general Value.
This is somewhat Counter-Predictive, As i have just suggested that The Calm will win over The Panicky, So that with Random Information Hedging their Motivations, The Results should also be Random.
But what i am also suggesting is that It’s All Random, All The Time.
The Winners are The Rich, who, After losing their Daily Allowance, are able to keep playing until they Win Again,
While The Poor are Wiped out when They Lose, Extracting them from The Game.
Prudent ‘Trading’ may give The Rich a Slight Edge,
But The Most egregiously imprudent Trafficking of ‘Securities’ will yield a Jackpot Occasionally.
- - - : o
Organizing such an Experiment would be substantially less complicated than The 911 Hoax, which makes me suspect that it’s already being performed by Some Mischievious Millionaire, and we are only left to wonder;
How long has this Experiment been running?
- - - : o
If i were king of The World,
i would outlaw it immediately; and restructure a new mechanism for funding new businesses & such.
It makes all The Sense in The World for you to Invest in Your Neighbor’s New Idea for a Perpetual Motion Machine, but once S’he sells enough units to start turning a profit, S’he should buy back all The Stock you bought, and reinstate unambiguous control of The Company.
- - - : o
i can not understand why Huge Corporations still have stock floating around amoung The Damp Masses.
It might make sense for The Employees of The Company to Own Part of The Company,
But that should be Automatic, without going through The Motions of Choosing to Buy into The Company. Every Employee by The Fact that they are An Employee is A ’Natural’ Investor in The Company.
- - - : o
But i digress.
What most annoys me is ‘Stock Market Players’ buy & sell, sell & buy stock all day, Occasionally ‘Making’ or ‘Earning’ huge dividends.
Granted; Even amoung The Players that are any good at this,
Aren’t very good at this.
But in Theory; When A Stock Market Investor Wins The Jackpot—
What have they contributed To The Gross National Product?
What Product or Service have they Added to The Economy?
- - - : o
Obviously : Nothing.
So where does their new income come from?
It comes from The Other Poor Bastards that Thought that they were going to hit The Jackpot, but got cold feet, Panicked when their stock fluctuated, or Ran when they thought that they heard some pots & pans falling in The Apartment next door.
The Stock Market is Purely A Lottery, In which The Cool & Staid sit patiently and follow The One & Only Rule to Win in The Stock Market.
Newer Sell your Stock when it’s lower than when you bought it.
Also:
When everyone else is Selling, You Buy.
When everyone else is Buying, You Sell.
It’s quite amazing that so few ‘Investors’ understand these rules.
- - - : o
But i digress.
What really brought me to The Rant File today is An Idea for —
A Wonderfully Simple Experiment.
Feed The Business News Programs Completely Random Stock Figures.
That is; if Bell Telephone is Selling today for $42 a share,
Your Computer program creates a Random Number to it’s Value so that The Business Analysts will think it’s selling for $12 a Share.
It might just as easily been assigned $239 a Share.
My prediction is that The Analysts won’t suspect The Slightest Shenanigans are Being Poured on them, As they are well aware that The Stock Market Fluctuates Wildly from Day to Day, and Will further Rationalize how these Values are Fitting Perfectly with The Daily News.
What is more; The Winners & Losers in The Stock Market will blithely Trade on these bogus figures, buying & selling with The Same Enthusiasm & Trepidation as they Always have, and No Noticeable Effect will incur upon their general Value.
This is somewhat Counter-Predictive, As i have just suggested that The Calm will win over The Panicky, So that with Random Information Hedging their Motivations, The Results should also be Random.
But what i am also suggesting is that It’s All Random, All The Time.
The Winners are The Rich, who, After losing their Daily Allowance, are able to keep playing until they Win Again,
While The Poor are Wiped out when They Lose, Extracting them from The Game.
Prudent ‘Trading’ may give The Rich a Slight Edge,
But The Most egregiously imprudent Trafficking of ‘Securities’ will yield a Jackpot Occasionally.
- - - : o
Organizing such an Experiment would be substantially less complicated than The 911 Hoax, which makes me suspect that it’s already being performed by Some Mischievious Millionaire, and we are only left to wonder;
How long has this Experiment been running?
More 911 NonSense !
Thursday September 8th 2011
Good Morning America featured some ‘New’ Tapes from 911.
- - -
A ) These tapes are =Astonishingly= Clear, it’s like listening to The Mel Gibson Tapes in which The Parts Recorded of his Girl Friend; Oksana Grigorieva, were clearly dubbed in and Mixed with Prior Phone Conversations with Mel.
B.a) They are Smoking Gun tapes with Oodles of Valuable Information and Numerous Eye Witnesses. Why in World would they have kept these tapes a Secret until now? ( ! )
B.b) They also revealed that they are still hanging onto another Tape of The Pennsylvania Plane's last few minutes, Apparently after 10 years they are still tweaking it.
C) One of The Tapes feature that Actual Voice ( Again; Amazingly clear when compared to all other Traffic Controller & Aircraft Radio Communications ) of one of The High Jackers. This could have been voice analyzed with background sounds to determine all sorts of new evidence.
In Particular; Why was this Tape kept a secret for so long !!!
- -
Also: In Other Conspiracy News : NASA has sometime in The Past and Again Recently released some photographs of tiny indistinct blobs on The Moon that it claims are The landing craft of The Apollo Moon Missions.
So they originally spent some 243 Quadrillion Dollars faking The Moon Landings, And now they want to present photographs, that are substantially less convincing that any given UFO film on You Tube, as Proof that The Landings were Real. ( ? )
- -
Mid September Alleged Truck Bombings were ‘Proven’ by The Discovery of apparently ‘Missing’ Trucks.
A ) If you did belong to an International Terrorist Organization with Billions of Dollars in Annual Funding, Why steal a truck, Why not just buy one?
B ) In The Day to Day Commerce of National Trucking; How many Trucks are routinely stolen or high jacked for any given month for purely commercial purposes?
C ) Considering that this is Plot is fairly simple & Inexpensive, why has Al Qaeda waited 10 years to try anything at all? ( discarding any prior ‘hairbrained’ schemes that have been shown to have been mostly The Result of planning by The FBI or other Agencies )
- - -
i'm really crawling out on a limb on this last one,
As the 'expected' terrorism isn't due to happen for a few days yet !
my prediction : nada.
Of course if nothing does happen; 'They' will take credit for foiling the plot!
Good Morning America featured some ‘New’ Tapes from 911.
- - -
A ) These tapes are =Astonishingly= Clear, it’s like listening to The Mel Gibson Tapes in which The Parts Recorded of his Girl Friend; Oksana Grigorieva, were clearly dubbed in and Mixed with Prior Phone Conversations with Mel.
B.a) They are Smoking Gun tapes with Oodles of Valuable Information and Numerous Eye Witnesses. Why in World would they have kept these tapes a Secret until now? ( ! )
B.b) They also revealed that they are still hanging onto another Tape of The Pennsylvania Plane's last few minutes, Apparently after 10 years they are still tweaking it.
C) One of The Tapes feature that Actual Voice ( Again; Amazingly clear when compared to all other Traffic Controller & Aircraft Radio Communications ) of one of The High Jackers. This could have been voice analyzed with background sounds to determine all sorts of new evidence.
In Particular; Why was this Tape kept a secret for so long !!!
- -
Also: In Other Conspiracy News : NASA has sometime in The Past and Again Recently released some photographs of tiny indistinct blobs on The Moon that it claims are The landing craft of The Apollo Moon Missions.
So they originally spent some 243 Quadrillion Dollars faking The Moon Landings, And now they want to present photographs, that are substantially less convincing that any given UFO film on You Tube, as Proof that The Landings were Real. ( ? )
- -
Mid September Alleged Truck Bombings were ‘Proven’ by The Discovery of apparently ‘Missing’ Trucks.
A ) If you did belong to an International Terrorist Organization with Billions of Dollars in Annual Funding, Why steal a truck, Why not just buy one?
B ) In The Day to Day Commerce of National Trucking; How many Trucks are routinely stolen or high jacked for any given month for purely commercial purposes?
C ) Considering that this is Plot is fairly simple & Inexpensive, why has Al Qaeda waited 10 years to try anything at all? ( discarding any prior ‘hairbrained’ schemes that have been shown to have been mostly The Result of planning by The FBI or other Agencies )
- - -
i'm really crawling out on a limb on this last one,
As the 'expected' terrorism isn't due to happen for a few days yet !
my prediction : nada.
Of course if nothing does happen; 'They' will take credit for foiling the plot!
Friday, August 19, 2011
A Curious Puzzle.
Do you have a favorite Masturbation Fantasy, or a Day-Dream, or BedTime Digesis that you throw yourself into as you drift off to sleep?
Do you ever find yourself desiring, more than anything else, To leave this world, and live in that Improbable Land of Nod?
The Bible Says : ‘Ask & Ye shall Receive.’
The Krishna’s believe that you can achieve any desired thing by simply reciting ’Nom Yo Ho Ren Gay Kio’ Over & Over again, Every Waking moment.
In The Matrix; Neo could do anything within The Matrix, So long as he ‘Really’ Believed that he was in The Matrix.
Ordinarily; Logically; You First Believe something, Believe it for Good Sound Reasons, And then; If it’s True, You Can Know It—
But in The Matrix; Neo & Mobius Knew they were in The Matrix,
But only Neo really believed it.
i Believe that i Know that this world is Fake.
There are things about this World, Our Reality, that are just Impossible.
There are many, many deeply suspicious things, like The Tides, or Vision, Consciousness, All sorts of things that Should Be, But Aren’t;
And The Paradox of Fundimental Particles.
But there are Other Things that are even more impossible.
Things that Prove that This World Can’t be Real.
Consequently;
It must have been Created by Some External Intelligence,
And while Not at all Necessary;
This Intelligence should be able to fulfill Any Desirous Thing that Residents of This World would Request.
The Question is; How?
Christians & Other Milquetoast Religions have suggested that by Doing Good, One will be suitably Rewarded. But to my way of thinking; Any Rewards that are Either Promised or Tacitly granted for Doing Good, completely defeats The Functionality or Sincerity of Goodness.
One must always do good for The Sake of Goodness & for No Other Reason.
If there is some way to Communicate to The Creator(s of this reality,
And request a change of Venue;
What is it?
i further believe that this is possible;
As there are ‘Stories’ or ‘Anecdotes’ of Saints & Unsuspecting Pedestrians that have been granted extraordinary powers, visions, visitations, artifacts or Knowledge that could only have delivered by Agents that exist at Tangental Angles to Any Line of Sight that The Pine Cones of This World are Capable of Drawing upon.
In all such stories;
The Common Denominator of Being Granted such Endowments is always;
Not Wanting It.
The Saint never wants to Levitate or Cure The Sick or Walk on Water,
They just find themselves, Watching themselves, Levitating, Curing The Sick or Walking on Water, and they routinely report that they are horrified by this turn of events.
Upon Reflection; They may concede that it is good to Cure The Sick, and Submissively request ‘Jesus’ to allow them to Cure Another Retched Soul from time to time, But each time; They are filled with Wonder & Dread at allowing such Powers to be poured through them.
This is similar to another quandary that i have long puzzled over;
How can i bring myself to Believe something that i have no good reason for Believing?
And now; This; How can i Not Want something that i very much desire?
Is This The Root of All Spiritual Knowledge?
It has been suggested that A Butterfly does not fly,
It floats on The Wind.
A Baby Bird is sure that it can’t fly,
And finds itself pushed from The Nest by it’s siblings or Mother,
Only to find, As it Flutters to The Ground in Panic, That it is flying.
No fish swims, They just exist in The Medium of Water,
Flowing along their own path of determinism.
Lao Tzu said to Follow The Dao.
But how does one, Not follow The Dao?
Many Creative People insist that they are most creative when they least desire to be Creative; While others insist that every creative work is nothing by arduous labor.
To be a really good typist, you have to forget about typing.
To Ride a Bicycle; You can’t think about riding a bicycle.
My Grandiose Wish is return to The Garden of Eden & Express every feather of Disdain for The Tree of Knowledge.
Is this what The Ancient Jewish Scholars ( Moses ) were telling us;
Knowledge will bring nothing of any value,
To be truly happy and receive everything we desire,
We must Truly Not Want It.
[ Is ] This is what The Garden of Eden is all About. ( ? )
If this Story has any Usefulness to it at all ( ! ? )
Then is its substance that Gawd -Wanted- Adam & Eve to Betray him and Eat of The Tree of Knowledge? Would Gawd have been very disappointed in Humanimals if they were content to live in The Garden of Eden forever ?
Would Gawd have shunted That world away to some corner of The Universe and Created another World with more Impudent Shaven Apes?
Which Version are We ?
- - -
It is Another of my deeply heretical beliefs that only atheists will be allowed into Heaven. This assumes that The Gawds want dynamic personalities with sufficient force of will and beliefs of fundimental notions of Goodness, to turn away from edicts that promise Eternal Damnation.
But The Garden of Eden Model Contradicts this.
How can it be Reconciled that The Ξ.6 Controllers want Vigorous, Spunky & Passionate Souls to Occupy Heaven; But are willing to Grant The Meekest Empty Minded Zen Buddhists All of Their Earthly Desires?
Raymond Smullyan in his Book _The Tao is Silent_;
Suggested that A Successful Person may become Successful, And Accomplish Great Things, By Not Wanting Them. Such a person would not strive for success, but allow success to be inflicted upon them, by simply doing all The things that they enjoyed doing, without really working on them.
Practicing is doing something over & over,
But what if you enjoyed doing something over & over,
and never considered it The Onerous burden of Practicing?
But all this still assumes that it is possible to Not Follow The Dao.
Although many things may looked terribly forced, That they happen at all must mean that The Universe meant it to happen all along.
Only Possible Things are Possible.
Everything that Happens, Could Not have Not Happened.
As easily as a Egg falls from a Chicken,
Sir Edmund Hillary Climbed to The Top of Mt. Everest.
- - -
Do you ever find yourself desiring, more than anything else, To leave this world, and live in that Improbable Land of Nod?
The Bible Says : ‘Ask & Ye shall Receive.’
The Krishna’s believe that you can achieve any desired thing by simply reciting ’Nom Yo Ho Ren Gay Kio’ Over & Over again, Every Waking moment.
In The Matrix; Neo could do anything within The Matrix, So long as he ‘Really’ Believed that he was in The Matrix.
Ordinarily; Logically; You First Believe something, Believe it for Good Sound Reasons, And then; If it’s True, You Can Know It—
But in The Matrix; Neo & Mobius Knew they were in The Matrix,
But only Neo really believed it.
i Believe that i Know that this world is Fake.
There are things about this World, Our Reality, that are just Impossible.
There are many, many deeply suspicious things, like The Tides, or Vision, Consciousness, All sorts of things that Should Be, But Aren’t;
And The Paradox of Fundimental Particles.
But there are Other Things that are even more impossible.
Things that Prove that This World Can’t be Real.
Consequently;
It must have been Created by Some External Intelligence,
And while Not at all Necessary;
This Intelligence should be able to fulfill Any Desirous Thing that Residents of This World would Request.
The Question is; How?
Christians & Other Milquetoast Religions have suggested that by Doing Good, One will be suitably Rewarded. But to my way of thinking; Any Rewards that are Either Promised or Tacitly granted for Doing Good, completely defeats The Functionality or Sincerity of Goodness.
One must always do good for The Sake of Goodness & for No Other Reason.
If there is some way to Communicate to The Creator(s of this reality,
And request a change of Venue;
What is it?
i further believe that this is possible;
As there are ‘Stories’ or ‘Anecdotes’ of Saints & Unsuspecting Pedestrians that have been granted extraordinary powers, visions, visitations, artifacts or Knowledge that could only have delivered by Agents that exist at Tangental Angles to Any Line of Sight that The Pine Cones of This World are Capable of Drawing upon.
In all such stories;
The Common Denominator of Being Granted such Endowments is always;
Not Wanting It.
The Saint never wants to Levitate or Cure The Sick or Walk on Water,
They just find themselves, Watching themselves, Levitating, Curing The Sick or Walking on Water, and they routinely report that they are horrified by this turn of events.
Upon Reflection; They may concede that it is good to Cure The Sick, and Submissively request ‘Jesus’ to allow them to Cure Another Retched Soul from time to time, But each time; They are filled with Wonder & Dread at allowing such Powers to be poured through them.
This is similar to another quandary that i have long puzzled over;
How can i bring myself to Believe something that i have no good reason for Believing?
And now; This; How can i Not Want something that i very much desire?
Is This The Root of All Spiritual Knowledge?
It has been suggested that A Butterfly does not fly,
It floats on The Wind.
A Baby Bird is sure that it can’t fly,
And finds itself pushed from The Nest by it’s siblings or Mother,
Only to find, As it Flutters to The Ground in Panic, That it is flying.
No fish swims, They just exist in The Medium of Water,
Flowing along their own path of determinism.
Lao Tzu said to Follow The Dao.
But how does one, Not follow The Dao?
Many Creative People insist that they are most creative when they least desire to be Creative; While others insist that every creative work is nothing by arduous labor.
To be a really good typist, you have to forget about typing.
To Ride a Bicycle; You can’t think about riding a bicycle.
My Grandiose Wish is return to The Garden of Eden & Express every feather of Disdain for The Tree of Knowledge.
Is this what The Ancient Jewish Scholars ( Moses ) were telling us;
Knowledge will bring nothing of any value,
To be truly happy and receive everything we desire,
We must Truly Not Want It.
[ Is ] This is what The Garden of Eden is all About. ( ? )
If this Story has any Usefulness to it at all ( ! ? )
Then is its substance that Gawd -Wanted- Adam & Eve to Betray him and Eat of The Tree of Knowledge? Would Gawd have been very disappointed in Humanimals if they were content to live in The Garden of Eden forever ?
Would Gawd have shunted That world away to some corner of The Universe and Created another World with more Impudent Shaven Apes?
Which Version are We ?
- - -
It is Another of my deeply heretical beliefs that only atheists will be allowed into Heaven. This assumes that The Gawds want dynamic personalities with sufficient force of will and beliefs of fundimental notions of Goodness, to turn away from edicts that promise Eternal Damnation.
But The Garden of Eden Model Contradicts this.
How can it be Reconciled that The Ξ.6 Controllers want Vigorous, Spunky & Passionate Souls to Occupy Heaven; But are willing to Grant The Meekest Empty Minded Zen Buddhists All of Their Earthly Desires?
Raymond Smullyan in his Book _The Tao is Silent_;
Suggested that A Successful Person may become Successful, And Accomplish Great Things, By Not Wanting Them. Such a person would not strive for success, but allow success to be inflicted upon them, by simply doing all The things that they enjoyed doing, without really working on them.
Practicing is doing something over & over,
But what if you enjoyed doing something over & over,
and never considered it The Onerous burden of Practicing?
But all this still assumes that it is possible to Not Follow The Dao.
Although many things may looked terribly forced, That they happen at all must mean that The Universe meant it to happen all along.
Only Possible Things are Possible.
Everything that Happens, Could Not have Not Happened.
As easily as a Egg falls from a Chicken,
Sir Edmund Hillary Climbed to The Top of Mt. Everest.
- - -
Beyound Belief / ( TV Show on ABC ) August 17th 2011
Concerning The Million Dollar Challenge :
i was very annoyed that all The Participants agreed to conditions that they wouldn’t ordinarily operate from.
If i were confident in my Tarot/Divination Card Readings;
i would insist on these conditions.
The Tester provide me with 20 participants that:
Are Believers & Not Extruding Negative Energy.
There is No Possibility that i could have any Prior Contact with them,
Or have access to any Details about their Lives.
That is; These people would have a genuinely minimal web presence.
Each Participant would have a Question that they would like to Ask,
That they are Very Genuinely Interested in having Answered.
This Question should be of a Kind that any Attentive 3rd Grader would be able to Understand, and respond intelligently to, If they Knew The Correct Answer.
Each Participant would Not Know The Answer to Their Question,
But be Able to Verify if The Answer that i would Provide is Either Correct or InCorrect,
And Preferably; These Answers could be ‘Partially Correct’ or Correct to some degree between Zero ( Completely False ) & One ( Fully Resolved )
Each Participant would sit across from me during The Reading
i would be Allowed a Minimal Contact with The Participant at The Beginning of The Reading. ( Finger Tips Touch )
And They would answer any Questions that i put to them without hesitation & would be correct to The best of their ability.
Since The Questions that Participants would be Asking are Very Open Ended,
The Success Rate would be Measured on a Quantitative Value of 10 out of 20.
So that a .5 for Each would be 10; or A Passing Score.
- -
Psychics have been talking to The dead for a long time,
But they have never come out with definitive proof of their existence,
For some ( ? ) reason.
They are apparently very reluctant to allow their existence to be proven.
They apparently only allow communications across The Barrier of Life to reveal ‘important’ messages,
But not frivolous messages for some ulterior motive,
Such as to win a million dollars or become famous.
- -
i would be willing to concede that most psychics are fakes,
But if someone were interested in providing as proof for The Existence of good drivers, musicians or artists;
All The people that claim that they are good drivers, or good musicians, or good artists;
This Will result in disappointment, and a good counter argument that there are No good drivers, musicians or artists.
- -
My own suspicions tend to believe that all The Best, most sincere psychics operate nearly invisibly, providing help to people that they casually meet, and provide their skills without overt payment, although accepting a small unsolicited gratuity, or ‘returning a favor’ would be permissible.
- -
The machinery that allows for psychic phenomena to exist is completely unknown,
and as such; It is difficult ( impossible ) to know how to properly test for it.
Such phenomena occurs pretty much like tornados, ball lightning, slipping in The bathtub or waiting for a tune to form The basis for a new song.
You just have to allow these things to happen, and observe them as carefully as you can, to draw upon their validity when analyzing them later.
Granted; It’s very difficult to study something that you don’t have any idea what it is to begin with, but if it happens spontaneously often enough, it should be reasonable to most reasonable people that The phenomena really exists.
- -
The Other Principle problem with most psychic phenomena is that stage magicians have found ways to duplicate most such effects.
Of course; Just because something can be faked, doesn’t mean that it is.
- -
Photographic Evidence has always been suspect, and nowadays, such evidence, presented on it’s own merit, is entirely dubious.
So that now when someone does come forward with a flying saucer story, and have pictures to back it up, The pictures are worthless, and The story should be suspect, but The listener is still left with The option of evaluating The Veracity of The Reporter and if determined to be Sincere, The photograph may assumed to contain useful information, until demonstrated to be otherwise.
- -
Likewise; Any Psychic ‘Effect’ is probably worthless, despite it’s ‘Amazingness’, But The Overall phenomena, taking into consideration Any New Information Presented, Along with The absence of ‘Hokiness’, The Cost of The Service & Whether or not The Service was sought or solicited would all be taken to determine whether something genuinely interesting happened or not.
i was very annoyed that all The Participants agreed to conditions that they wouldn’t ordinarily operate from.
If i were confident in my Tarot/Divination Card Readings;
i would insist on these conditions.
The Tester provide me with 20 participants that:
Are Believers & Not Extruding Negative Energy.
There is No Possibility that i could have any Prior Contact with them,
Or have access to any Details about their Lives.
That is; These people would have a genuinely minimal web presence.
Each Participant would have a Question that they would like to Ask,
That they are Very Genuinely Interested in having Answered.
This Question should be of a Kind that any Attentive 3rd Grader would be able to Understand, and respond intelligently to, If they Knew The Correct Answer.
Each Participant would Not Know The Answer to Their Question,
But be Able to Verify if The Answer that i would Provide is Either Correct or InCorrect,
And Preferably; These Answers could be ‘Partially Correct’ or Correct to some degree between Zero ( Completely False ) & One ( Fully Resolved )
Each Participant would sit across from me during The Reading
i would be Allowed a Minimal Contact with The Participant at The Beginning of The Reading. ( Finger Tips Touch )
And They would answer any Questions that i put to them without hesitation & would be correct to The best of their ability.
Since The Questions that Participants would be Asking are Very Open Ended,
The Success Rate would be Measured on a Quantitative Value of 10 out of 20.
So that a .5 for Each would be 10; or A Passing Score.
- -
Psychics have been talking to The dead for a long time,
But they have never come out with definitive proof of their existence,
For some ( ? ) reason.
They are apparently very reluctant to allow their existence to be proven.
They apparently only allow communications across The Barrier of Life to reveal ‘important’ messages,
But not frivolous messages for some ulterior motive,
Such as to win a million dollars or become famous.
- -
i would be willing to concede that most psychics are fakes,
But if someone were interested in providing as proof for The Existence of good drivers, musicians or artists;
All The people that claim that they are good drivers, or good musicians, or good artists;
This Will result in disappointment, and a good counter argument that there are No good drivers, musicians or artists.
- -
My own suspicions tend to believe that all The Best, most sincere psychics operate nearly invisibly, providing help to people that they casually meet, and provide their skills without overt payment, although accepting a small unsolicited gratuity, or ‘returning a favor’ would be permissible.
- -
The machinery that allows for psychic phenomena to exist is completely unknown,
and as such; It is difficult ( impossible ) to know how to properly test for it.
Such phenomena occurs pretty much like tornados, ball lightning, slipping in The bathtub or waiting for a tune to form The basis for a new song.
You just have to allow these things to happen, and observe them as carefully as you can, to draw upon their validity when analyzing them later.
Granted; It’s very difficult to study something that you don’t have any idea what it is to begin with, but if it happens spontaneously often enough, it should be reasonable to most reasonable people that The phenomena really exists.
- -
The Other Principle problem with most psychic phenomena is that stage magicians have found ways to duplicate most such effects.
Of course; Just because something can be faked, doesn’t mean that it is.
- -
Photographic Evidence has always been suspect, and nowadays, such evidence, presented on it’s own merit, is entirely dubious.
So that now when someone does come forward with a flying saucer story, and have pictures to back it up, The pictures are worthless, and The story should be suspect, but The listener is still left with The option of evaluating The Veracity of The Reporter and if determined to be Sincere, The photograph may assumed to contain useful information, until demonstrated to be otherwise.
- -
Likewise; Any Psychic ‘Effect’ is probably worthless, despite it’s ‘Amazingness’, But The Overall phenomena, taking into consideration Any New Information Presented, Along with The absence of ‘Hokiness’, The Cost of The Service & Whether or not The Service was sought or solicited would all be taken to determine whether something genuinely interesting happened or not.
AirPort 'Security' is a Giant RipOff Super Scam !
There is something massively wrong with this world.
i’ve known this for some time now, and generally attributed it to The Incredible Stupidity of The Damp Masses, which has been thoroughly documented, but curiously left untreated.
Why do Smart People let dumb people run The World?
Every once in a while; An even more egregious example will present itself.
This morning on Good Morning America ( August 15 2011 ) There was a story about reselling ‘Lost’ or ‘Confiscated’ items at Airport during ‘Security Screenings’.
What most annoyed me was that The Two News Readers thought that this was The Funniest Thing Imaginable that all these Frazzled Travelers were being routinely fleeced by Airport ‘Security Agents’.
It has occurred to me 10 years ago that The Proper Procedure for Dealing with ‘Unacceptable’ items, would be to provide an Envelope or Tag to The Traveler, Put The Item in The Envelope; Which is Routed to The Baggage Area and Then Retrieved At The Terminus Destination. This does not seem unreasonable to me. If So; Then The Initial Baggage Check in should take steps to intercept these items during Check in.
The Other Source for These ‘Lost’ Items was that many Travelers simply ‘Forget’ that they have just removed their watches, computers, jewelry & other items during screening and walked off without them. This is Certainly The Responsibility of The Screeners to Check The Bins and Sound an Alarm and Close an Intermediate Gate when they notice that an Bin has not be emptied. How can they just look at expensive items left in a Bin and shrug it off.
That is just astonishingly evil.
Why don’t people ‘Get This’ ?
What is Wrong with The World?
Are People really no more Intelligent than fish?
Is it that most people have no ‘Sense’ of ‘What is Wrong’ ?
i’ve known this for some time now, and generally attributed it to The Incredible Stupidity of The Damp Masses, which has been thoroughly documented, but curiously left untreated.
Why do Smart People let dumb people run The World?
Every once in a while; An even more egregious example will present itself.
This morning on Good Morning America ( August 15 2011 ) There was a story about reselling ‘Lost’ or ‘Confiscated’ items at Airport during ‘Security Screenings’.
What most annoyed me was that The Two News Readers thought that this was The Funniest Thing Imaginable that all these Frazzled Travelers were being routinely fleeced by Airport ‘Security Agents’.
It has occurred to me 10 years ago that The Proper Procedure for Dealing with ‘Unacceptable’ items, would be to provide an Envelope or Tag to The Traveler, Put The Item in The Envelope; Which is Routed to The Baggage Area and Then Retrieved At The Terminus Destination. This does not seem unreasonable to me. If So; Then The Initial Baggage Check in should take steps to intercept these items during Check in.
The Other Source for These ‘Lost’ Items was that many Travelers simply ‘Forget’ that they have just removed their watches, computers, jewelry & other items during screening and walked off without them. This is Certainly The Responsibility of The Screeners to Check The Bins and Sound an Alarm and Close an Intermediate Gate when they notice that an Bin has not be emptied. How can they just look at expensive items left in a Bin and shrug it off.
That is just astonishingly evil.
Why don’t people ‘Get This’ ?
What is Wrong with The World?
Are People really no more Intelligent than fish?
Is it that most people have no ‘Sense’ of ‘What is Wrong’ ?
MegaPixel Comparison
Commentary for MegaPixel Comparison
i recently went to A Family Reunion in Wallace, Idaho and in order to take as many pictures as possible; i set my Small Nikon Camera to 5 MegaPixels, which would allow me to take about 3000 pictures, which seemed reasonable to me.
- - -
Unfortunately; i have never had The battery go dead on it, so i thought i would not need to take The charger with me, and discovered to my horror that after only 1,355 pictures, The battery went dead.
It’s equipped with a very expensive rechargeable battery, so i was just stuck.
- - -
i had my iPod Touch with me, and bought The recharger for it with me, so i was able to take a few more hundred pictures at a much lower resolution.
- - -
When i got home though, i discovered that very few of The pictures came out !
i don’t recall this happening before, even when i took a bunch of pictures at my mother’s funeral with my iPod Touch, i thought that most of them came out pretty well, and it was taking pictures at .69 Megapixels !
This was very odd.
- - -
So i decided to do some experiments with image resolution,
And discovered that The Oldie Time ‘Film’ Images are Way Better at holding on to subtle gradations of Grey Tones than The Best ( 12 Megapixel Digital Images ! )
After scanning many of The Old Pictures from my Families Albums, i had gotten used to The idea that i could bring up very dark images, or images with very dark backgrounds, or images with seriously faded colors, and bring them back to near pristine condition !
- - -
But my simple experiments that consisted of enlarging a small image against a sun lit background showed that whether The Image was taken with 12 or 8 or 5 MegaPixels,
The results of trying to recover it, were about The same.
In other words, The 12 Megapixel images were only marginally better than The 8 or 5 MegaPixel Images.
Further Graphing of The Results verified this.
While there is a big difference between a 1 to 2 Megapixel Image,
For The same improvement from 12 Megapixels, You’d have to jump to A 24 Megapixel Image !
- - -
Note : The Arc Pixels in The Graph; For this =Comparison=, Refers to The Angular Size of One Pixel’s Width & Height. This would actually vary depending on The Focal Length of The Lens; But for This Graph, They are all The Same ‘Theoretical Lens Length’. The Smaller The Angular Pixel Size, The Better is The Resolution.
- - -
Curiously; The Amount of Memory to Store These Images Remains fairly constant with a Factor of Roughly .3 of The Megapixel Volume.
That is; A 12 MegaPixel Image with Millions of Colors will be about 12 x .3 = 3.6 Megabytes.
The actual size & quality of The image is going to depend upon several factors, including The brightness of The environment & how Detailed The image is, which will factor into The .jpg Compression Algorithms.
- -
.jgp Compresses Images for The Best Image, Taking into Consideration that A Slightly Depreciated Image Quality is Acceptable for A Much Smaller File Size.
- -
.tiff Compresses Images with No Consideration for Image Depreciation, and Consequently; Have a Much Larger File Size.
- -
.gif is an older format for sharing images on The Earliest Generation of Computers & Very Slow Modems. When Computer modems got faster, The Better .jpg Algorithm superseded it.
- - -
ISO originally referred to A Film’s ‘Speed’. A Greater ISO of 400 allowed The Photographer to take pictures in Darker Environments, such as Indoors, without a Flash. The Same idea is Applied to Digital Photography, with The Same Results,
Setting your Digital ISO to a higher amount will adversely effect your image quality. Something that i should have been more aware of !
The Digital ISO tells The Camera to allow for Faster Shutter Speeds in Lower Light, Sacrificing Image Quality.
- - -
It’s best to set everything on Automatic, and if The Camera thinks that you should use The Flash, Even if you hate Flashed Images, You need to use The Flash, Or else.
Else being surprising Grainy ( Pixelated ) or Smeared Images.
- - -
ugh.
i recently went to A Family Reunion in Wallace, Idaho and in order to take as many pictures as possible; i set my Small Nikon Camera to 5 MegaPixels, which would allow me to take about 3000 pictures, which seemed reasonable to me.
- - -
Unfortunately; i have never had The battery go dead on it, so i thought i would not need to take The charger with me, and discovered to my horror that after only 1,355 pictures, The battery went dead.
It’s equipped with a very expensive rechargeable battery, so i was just stuck.
- - -
i had my iPod Touch with me, and bought The recharger for it with me, so i was able to take a few more hundred pictures at a much lower resolution.
- - -
When i got home though, i discovered that very few of The pictures came out !
i don’t recall this happening before, even when i took a bunch of pictures at my mother’s funeral with my iPod Touch, i thought that most of them came out pretty well, and it was taking pictures at .69 Megapixels !
This was very odd.
- - -
So i decided to do some experiments with image resolution,
And discovered that The Oldie Time ‘Film’ Images are Way Better at holding on to subtle gradations of Grey Tones than The Best ( 12 Megapixel Digital Images ! )
After scanning many of The Old Pictures from my Families Albums, i had gotten used to The idea that i could bring up very dark images, or images with very dark backgrounds, or images with seriously faded colors, and bring them back to near pristine condition !
- - -
But my simple experiments that consisted of enlarging a small image against a sun lit background showed that whether The Image was taken with 12 or 8 or 5 MegaPixels,
The results of trying to recover it, were about The same.
In other words, The 12 Megapixel images were only marginally better than The 8 or 5 MegaPixel Images.
Further Graphing of The Results verified this.
While there is a big difference between a 1 to 2 Megapixel Image,
For The same improvement from 12 Megapixels, You’d have to jump to A 24 Megapixel Image !
- - -
Note : The Arc Pixels in The Graph; For this =Comparison=, Refers to The Angular Size of One Pixel’s Width & Height. This would actually vary depending on The Focal Length of The Lens; But for This Graph, They are all The Same ‘Theoretical Lens Length’. The Smaller The Angular Pixel Size, The Better is The Resolution.
- - -
Curiously; The Amount of Memory to Store These Images Remains fairly constant with a Factor of Roughly .3 of The Megapixel Volume.
That is; A 12 MegaPixel Image with Millions of Colors will be about 12 x .3 = 3.6 Megabytes.
The actual size & quality of The image is going to depend upon several factors, including The brightness of The environment & how Detailed The image is, which will factor into The .jpg Compression Algorithms.
- -
.jgp Compresses Images for The Best Image, Taking into Consideration that A Slightly Depreciated Image Quality is Acceptable for A Much Smaller File Size.
- -
.tiff Compresses Images with No Consideration for Image Depreciation, and Consequently; Have a Much Larger File Size.
- -
.gif is an older format for sharing images on The Earliest Generation of Computers & Very Slow Modems. When Computer modems got faster, The Better .jpg Algorithm superseded it.
- - -
ISO originally referred to A Film’s ‘Speed’. A Greater ISO of 400 allowed The Photographer to take pictures in Darker Environments, such as Indoors, without a Flash. The Same idea is Applied to Digital Photography, with The Same Results,
Setting your Digital ISO to a higher amount will adversely effect your image quality. Something that i should have been more aware of !
The Digital ISO tells The Camera to allow for Faster Shutter Speeds in Lower Light, Sacrificing Image Quality.
- - -
It’s best to set everything on Automatic, and if The Camera thinks that you should use The Flash, Even if you hate Flashed Images, You need to use The Flash, Or else.
Else being surprising Grainy ( Pixelated ) or Smeared Images.
- - -
ugh.
Monday, July 25, 2011
The Structured Use of Randomality
Derived from Comments made to : Neither D or R by Wm Jas
This seems like ( upon greater reflection ) a much more interesting consideration than i originally granted it.
What needs to be done is to define a continuum of How Determinism & Randomality may be mixed together in various ways.
i continue to believe that this isn’t going to help The Problem of Freewill one iota, but i also believe that there are several distinct classes of how randomality may effect a classical deterministic model.
The Continuum would consist of a Perfect & Simple ( Dominoistic ) Determinism
on One Side ( On The Left ) And Perfect Randomality on The Right Side.
Holistic Determinism, When Every Particle in The Model is Affecting Every Other Particle, Via Instantaneous Forces, would be at The Middle.
A Holistic Deterministic Universe, with Forces acting at The Speed of Light Would be Just to The Left of That. ( Very Close to Our Observed Reality )
What really got me going on this ‘ReConsideration’ was that i thought of an Example, that i’d played around with on The Computer, that would satisfy this Definition; Of An Orderly Structure that ‘Evolves’ with A Distinct Random Element regularly interjected into it.
The Orderly Structure Contains ( Constrains ) The Randomality,
So that, In this Example, The Structure ( Overall ) is Not changed in The Least.
If The Random Element was replaced with The Fibonacci Sequence, or any other Mathematical Series, The Net Result would Look Pretty Much The Same.
Indistinguishable from one another if you stepped back from them.
The Example that i’m thinking of for this case;
Would be to arrange any number of Dots on A Field, ( 3 is Clearest ),
( In roughly a Circular Form, with an Open Space in The Middle )
Then Randomly Select an (x,y) Coordinate inside this space, Position (A)
- Start of Loop -
And Additionally Randomly Select One of The Other Dots,
Previously Defined, Position (B)
Then Apply The Simple Rule, of Determining The Point, One Half of The Distance from Your Original Position (A), To Position (B) And Placing a Dot There.
This New Dot is Now Position (A)
- Repeat Several Thousand Times -
( The One Half Rule can be any Fractional Value,
So long as it’s The Same amount of Each Itineration )
The Result will be ( ± ) a Sierpinski Triangle ( The Triangle of Pascal, Modulo 2 )
Vaguely Like this :
Borrowed from : YoyoBandalore's Flickr Album ( without Permission ! )
i am also fascinated by Chaos, which i understand to be Orderliness of such a extreme complexity, that it is indistinguishable for Randomality.
Curiously; These Chaotic Systems Are completely unpredictable when examined in small boxes, but when you allow them to run around in The Back Yard, and Film them with a Time Lapse Camera, They reveal a Very Distinct ‘Macro Pattern’ of somekind.
What is so remarkable about these Chaotic Systems is that they are able to Return to Their ‘True Nature’ while Internally, They seem Completely Random.
This also brings to mind Scanning Electron Microscopic Pictures of Some QuasiRegular Crystals. These are Crystal Formations in which A Regular Pattern is Revealed, But can only be Examined at a Comparatively Large Scale.
A ‘Normal’ Crystal, like Salt or Diamond, will look like Salt or Diamond, at Whatever Scale you Examine Any Number of NaCl Molecules or Carbon Atoms.
But a QuasiCrystal will look like one thing, such as a perfectly flat plane for several thousand atoms, Then Suddenly manifest itself as tower structure, then return to The Plane, and Then after awhile, Make another Tower, exactly like The One that we just examined.
What is Amazing ( ? ) is that The ‘Instructions’ for how to make The Tower, were hiding in The Flat Plane.
All The While that The Atoms were laying there so peacefully flat, They were counting off how many atoms from The Last Tower, before Starting a New One.
How can they do that?
Are they all just a teeny tiny bit out of angular registration,
or is there a musical tone that they are holding onto, that contains that secret information?
Is this sort of thing Extremely Common?
Is there ‘Secret’ Information hiding in Everything?
Layers & Layers of ‘Causal Determinism’ that is hiding from view.
So that besides The Holistic Interactivity of All The Particles in The Universe ( Pretty much so ) Interacting with Each Other,
There is Another Layer of Causal Determinism hiding inside All These Particles, That are telling them how to create MacroScopic Objects & Effects.
The point being;
If you’re sure that ‘Randomality’ is Necessary to Create The Complexity of The Observed Reality;
That’s probably not necessary.
Recursive Chaos is Completely Orderly;
But is Indistinguishable from Any Theoretical Randomality that you might wish to Imagine.
And how does this help Freewill?
Not in The Least.
Given all The Information that’s Available;
The Only Way that Freewill makes sense,
Is to Equate it with Autonomy,
And Define The Universe itself as Autonomous,
And Then Claim that Every ‘Node’ of Consciousness
Is Sharing The Autonomy & Freewill of The Universe.
Sharing Autonomy may sound like an oxymoronic statement,
But it also seems to make sense in a perfectly kooky kind of way.
But it still doesn’t allow for Deterministic Determinism.
That is something that no Example of has ever been observed under Laboratory Conditions.
This seems like ( upon greater reflection ) a much more interesting consideration than i originally granted it.
What needs to be done is to define a continuum of How Determinism & Randomality may be mixed together in various ways.
i continue to believe that this isn’t going to help The Problem of Freewill one iota, but i also believe that there are several distinct classes of how randomality may effect a classical deterministic model.
The Continuum would consist of a Perfect & Simple ( Dominoistic ) Determinism
on One Side ( On The Left ) And Perfect Randomality on The Right Side.
Holistic Determinism, When Every Particle in The Model is Affecting Every Other Particle, Via Instantaneous Forces, would be at The Middle.
A Holistic Deterministic Universe, with Forces acting at The Speed of Light Would be Just to The Left of That. ( Very Close to Our Observed Reality )
What really got me going on this ‘ReConsideration’ was that i thought of an Example, that i’d played around with on The Computer, that would satisfy this Definition; Of An Orderly Structure that ‘Evolves’ with A Distinct Random Element regularly interjected into it.
The Orderly Structure Contains ( Constrains ) The Randomality,
So that, In this Example, The Structure ( Overall ) is Not changed in The Least.
If The Random Element was replaced with The Fibonacci Sequence, or any other Mathematical Series, The Net Result would Look Pretty Much The Same.
Indistinguishable from one another if you stepped back from them.
The Example that i’m thinking of for this case;
Would be to arrange any number of Dots on A Field, ( 3 is Clearest ),
( In roughly a Circular Form, with an Open Space in The Middle )
Then Randomly Select an (x,y) Coordinate inside this space, Position (A)
- Start of Loop -
And Additionally Randomly Select One of The Other Dots,
Previously Defined, Position (B)
Then Apply The Simple Rule, of Determining The Point, One Half of The Distance from Your Original Position (A), To Position (B) And Placing a Dot There.
This New Dot is Now Position (A)
- Repeat Several Thousand Times -
( The One Half Rule can be any Fractional Value,
So long as it’s The Same amount of Each Itineration )
The Result will be ( ± ) a Sierpinski Triangle ( The Triangle of Pascal, Modulo 2 )
Vaguely Like this :
Borrowed from : YoyoBandalore's Flickr Album ( without Permission ! )
i am also fascinated by Chaos, which i understand to be Orderliness of such a extreme complexity, that it is indistinguishable for Randomality.
Curiously; These Chaotic Systems Are completely unpredictable when examined in small boxes, but when you allow them to run around in The Back Yard, and Film them with a Time Lapse Camera, They reveal a Very Distinct ‘Macro Pattern’ of somekind.
What is so remarkable about these Chaotic Systems is that they are able to Return to Their ‘True Nature’ while Internally, They seem Completely Random.
This also brings to mind Scanning Electron Microscopic Pictures of Some QuasiRegular Crystals. These are Crystal Formations in which A Regular Pattern is Revealed, But can only be Examined at a Comparatively Large Scale.
A ‘Normal’ Crystal, like Salt or Diamond, will look like Salt or Diamond, at Whatever Scale you Examine Any Number of NaCl Molecules or Carbon Atoms.
But a QuasiCrystal will look like one thing, such as a perfectly flat plane for several thousand atoms, Then Suddenly manifest itself as tower structure, then return to The Plane, and Then after awhile, Make another Tower, exactly like The One that we just examined.
What is Amazing ( ? ) is that The ‘Instructions’ for how to make The Tower, were hiding in The Flat Plane.
All The While that The Atoms were laying there so peacefully flat, They were counting off how many atoms from The Last Tower, before Starting a New One.
How can they do that?
Are they all just a teeny tiny bit out of angular registration,
or is there a musical tone that they are holding onto, that contains that secret information?
Is this sort of thing Extremely Common?
Is there ‘Secret’ Information hiding in Everything?
Layers & Layers of ‘Causal Determinism’ that is hiding from view.
So that besides The Holistic Interactivity of All The Particles in The Universe ( Pretty much so ) Interacting with Each Other,
There is Another Layer of Causal Determinism hiding inside All These Particles, That are telling them how to create MacroScopic Objects & Effects.
The point being;
If you’re sure that ‘Randomality’ is Necessary to Create The Complexity of The Observed Reality;
That’s probably not necessary.
Recursive Chaos is Completely Orderly;
But is Indistinguishable from Any Theoretical Randomality that you might wish to Imagine.
And how does this help Freewill?
Not in The Least.
Given all The Information that’s Available;
The Only Way that Freewill makes sense,
Is to Equate it with Autonomy,
And Define The Universe itself as Autonomous,
And Then Claim that Every ‘Node’ of Consciousness
Is Sharing The Autonomy & Freewill of The Universe.
Sharing Autonomy may sound like an oxymoronic statement,
But it also seems to make sense in a perfectly kooky kind of way.
But it still doesn’t allow for Deterministic Determinism.
That is something that no Example of has ever been observed under Laboratory Conditions.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Intelligent Determinism
Intelligent Determinism ( or Deterministic Determinism ) = FreeWill
Various Marginally Edited Chaotic Thoughts
by Wanda Louise Campbell
This ( Half Baked ) Proof for Freewill brings to mind The Cartoon by Sidney Harris
In which The Distinguished Professor is Standing before A Blackboard;
One side of which is covered with Incomprehensible Calculations
& The Other side of The Board is Also covered with Complex Equations,
And between them—
The Professor has scrawled; ‘And then A Miracle Occurs’.
It has recently occurred to me What Miracle for Freewill is Required,
And How it may be Presented.
The Problem of Freewill is fairly easy to Outline.
The Universe as we experience it; Is Governed by A Orderly Structure which is routinely referred to as Cause & Effect.
This is also thought of as Determinism.
The Problem for Freewill is that if The Decisions that we Make are answerable to Cause & Effect, That pretty much nullifies Freewill.
One Solution is Introduce Quantum Mechanics and suggest that Randomality plays a part in our Decision making, But That nullifies Freewill as well.
Freewill requires that there is ‘Deliberate Intent’ that is Directed by An Autonomous Agent.
Regretfully; There are no examples of this that may be Examined or Verified,
Other than our own insistence that we’re doing it all The Time.
But our Brains; The Source of Our Minds, is made up of Chemicals in little bags, that are pushed around by tiny static charges that get their instructions from How The Universe Works.
Some Featherless Parakeets would like to believe that Our Minds are actually Ghosts that are trapped inside The Robots that we Call People. As such; The Ghost’s make all of our Autonomous Decisions— But there is a small problem with this.
This model simply pushes The Mechanics of Decision making out of The Mechanical Claws of The Meat Bags, Into The Fluffy Paws of some Spiritual Realm that must be :
Either Orderly or Disorderly; Just like The Physical Realm.
One Feeble Solution is to simply assert that The World we Perceive is Not The True Reality, And that The True Reality is So Very Different from Our Perceived Reality, That These Dichotomies of Order & Randomality, That we are sure are UnAvoidable— Are Illusions.
The True Reality; Which is forever Unknowable to us;
Has a very simple solution for how Freewill, Consciousness & Local Autonomy really work.
First:
Let us Define our Terms a little.
While Freewill & Local Autonomy may be Illusions.
We really do ( ? - Don’t we ) Experience Consciousness.
It may be that This Consciousness doesn’t do anything,
As; If all our thoughts are generated by The Mind ( Either within Our Brains or Souls )
and Then Experienced by our Consciousnesses, The Consciousness doesn’t have anything to do with Creating Those Thoughts, It only Experiences them.
That would be very annoying.
Let us attack this dilemma from a different direction.
One things that very much disturbs me; Is that there is Order in The Universe.
Why isn’t The Universe Random?
The most troubling thing about An Orderly Universe;
Is: Why Are All The Electrons Exactly The Same as One Another?
Granted; We’re making a lot of assumptions here, Principally about our understanding of matter & such— But Starting with The Elemental Axiom that The World is Pretty Much The Way we Experience it; Then: Where are all these Electrons getting their Instructions from; To all behave in exactly The Same Way?
This is so troubling that i’m going to jump past it.
Let us allow that there is something like; ‘The Bottom of The Universe’.
This has variously been called;
The Dao, Prana, Mana, Qi, The Holy Ghost, Odic Forcem, Morphic Fields, The Standard Model + Gravity, The Kitchen Floor, Yesod, The Akasha Pasture;
or The Ξ.0 Continuum.
It is Ruled over by The Troll Queen.
For what purpose; That is Another Wonderful Question.
But let us allow that this Kitchen Floor exists;
And from it; The One Tiniest Peanut is Multiplied to Fill The Universe,
And By Some Miraculous Rule that Governs it; It forms Quarks & Leptons,
Which combine to make Electrons & Neutrons & Photons & Such...
And They Follow Their Instructions which we call Physics & Chemistry.
From here; This modest Beginning—
i find it quite reasonable that Atoms would form,
Combine into most of The Elements,
And from these building blocks, The Visible Universe, At its largest Scale,
Would quite reasonably form Stars, Burst into Blazing Furnaces,
and find themselves surrounded with dense clouds of debris,
some of which may be thought of as Planets.
Water may collect on some of them;
And Its still reasonable that The Simple Principles of Chemistry
Could make Self Replicating Molecules.
But.
Just how much Complexity am i willing to allow this to proceed towards before i start to question just how much Intricacy can come from A Single Initial Premise,
Without any additional fudging?
Given any set of Rules; i am willing to allow that Complexity will -Always- Result—
But = this = Reality.
This one ?
Did it;
Could it have Resulted from A Single Initial Starting Point,
Countless Zillions of Years Ago,
Proceeding forward,
Tripping one Domino after another,
until… This ?
That seems improbable doesn’t it?
There is An Argument that puts a quick Kibosh on this hesitance to believe In The Evolutionist’s ‘Dead’ Universe;
And It simple states that in An Infinite Universe, That tries every imaginable combination of These Tiniest Peanuts; You will not only eventually come across A Visible Universe that is Exactly like this one; One with All The Wars, Art, Video Games, Sexual Perversions & Dinosaurs;
But There will be An Infinite number of them.
Not just a lot of them, But An Uncountable number of them.
But this argument is trying to find a way to understand,
Or at least allow for Freewill.
So far, It’s not going well.
But.
i would like you to consider this.
What if only possible things were possible.
This is quite different from; Anything is Possible, or worse; Everything is Possible.
I’ve always been very skeptical of The Assertion that There is Another Universe Exactly like this one; Except for one Tiny Detail.
It seems to me; That if This Duplicate Universe that was Exactly like this Universe for several billions of years, and then some small thing changes.
That would be breaking The Rules.
If this is correct.
If only Possible things are Possible;
Then There may be an Equally Infinite Number of Universes, But not Every Universe.
Then if you have a Very Improbable Universe; Like this one—
Maybe its not Inevitable.
Maybe it couldn’t just come about accidentally.
Maybe There would have to be some Fudging to keep it moving in some desired direction.
This model doesn’t say that this Fudging is caused by Gawd,
Or any intelligent entity at all.
It’s open ended on that point.
It is suggesting that along with The Kinds of Determinism that We’re familiar with,
There is another kind of Determinism.
It works just like The Dominoes Determinism,
But it can look a little bit into The Future, and by Some Unspecified Mechanism;
Pick which Domino to Knock over,
Because, for whatever reasons, It seems more desirable.
This Theory is Severely Incomplete.
But if only Possible Things Are Possible;
Then Some Improbable Realities are Actually Impossible,
Unless something pushes in from The Side and Make Impossible things happen.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A Divergent Collection of Scribbled Ideas
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-2 Empty Universe
-1 Randomality - ( In an Infinite Universe; This World / Visible Universe ( Expanding or Static Bubble of Our Reality ) - or - ( Our Perceptions of This Reality ( or My Perceptions in A Solipsistic Universe, of This Reality ) / Must ( ? ) Necessarily ( ? ) Come about, Not just once, but an Infinite Number of Times, with Infinite Variation ) !
0 Order / The Kitchen Floor
1 Fundamental Particles / Enables All Electrons to Be The Same
2 Physics / Chemistry / Easily Allows for A Universe filled with Atoms, Forces, Gravity, Light, Collapsing Stars, Planets & Even Self Replicating Molecules.
But if Occam’s Razor has any truth to it, Then instead of life evolving from this amazing chemical effect, The Oceans should have instead filled with a Gelatinous Muck that would have made further Evolution ImPossible.
2.5 Emergent Complexity / Emergent Complexity necessitates that some fundamental rules are developed first, and from these, their combinations provide for astonishing results which often appear to exhibit genuine intelligence. But where did The first rules come from, and how complex were they?
What are The Elemental Rules that Emergent Complexity is Constructed from, To Create The Contemporaneous World / Or Our Perceptions of It.
3 Intelligent Determinism / Intelligent Determinism is posited to allow that A World as we are familiar with it, would come into being by some mechanism other than as a randomly evolving clock-work toy.
At some ( UnDisclosed ) Point in The Natural Development of The Contemporaneous World as We Perceive It, The Complexity of It Defies The Clock-Work Explanation.
An Alternative to Intelligent Determinism ( ? or Is it exactly The Same ? ) is that The Fundamental Physics of The World, Created The First Rules, Which Allowed Emergent Complexity to Kick In, Which then produced An Intelligent Determinism, But this remains within The Realm of The Clock-Work Toy.
True Intelligent Determinism Suggests that This is A Distinguishable Form of Determinism from The Clock-Work Variety.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Pulled off The Interweb :
With no evidence of intelligent life other than ourselves, it appears that the process of starting with a star and ending with "advanced explosive lasting life" must be unlikely. This implies that at least one step in this process must be improbable. Hanson's list, while incomplete, describes the following nine steps in an "evolutionary path" that results in the colonization of the observable universe:
1. The right star system (including organics & potentially habitable planets)
2. Reproductive molecules (e.g. RNA)
3. Simple (prokaryotic) single-cell life
4. Complex (archaeatic & eukaryotic) single-cell life
5. Sexual reproduction
6. Multi-cell life
7. Tool-using animals with big brains
8. Where we are now
9. Colonization explosion
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Curious Thing about my Argument for The Necessary Intervention of A Determinant Determinism to Fudge The Ordinary Progression of Determinism,
( See xy Complexity Chart Above )
i am only troubled by a couple fine slivers along The Natureal History of This Reality.
i am fully comfortable in An Orderly Universe with Physics & Chemistry
And Stars forming,
And Planets with Oceans,
And Self Replicating Molecules,
And Then one of these Slivers appear,
And then Once There are Oceans full of Prokaryotes,
That seems perfectly reasonable,
Until They Develop into Nucleated Cells with DNA,
Which is Huge Stretch.
There are just too many layers of Cellular Mechanics that all have to work together from The First Step.
So that would be The Second Sliver.
And Then Multicellular Animals.
What is now known; All The Animals that Suddenly appeared during The PreCambrian Explosion of Life, All came from One Fully Formed Animal. It is now known that The Eyes in Insects & People didn’t Evolve Independently. Our Common Ancestor had Eyes.
It must have been a fully formed, Sexually Reproducing Animal.
Where did it come from?
Once you have all These Animals though; The Reigning Explanation of how They Mixed together to form all these other animals is quite elegant and believable.
But once these animals became a little bit pickier about allowing only sperms from their own species to fertilize their eggs, You’ve got problems again.
Every Time a New Species comes into existence, with it’s own unique number of chromosomes, you have to have several of them. You can’t just have one mutation, It has to be a bunch all at once.
But then if you jump way ahead to A Fully Functional Featherless Parakeet,
i am perfectly willing to allow that you could have a planet of Consciousless Robots that behave -Exactly- The way we do.
i am perfectly willing to allow that Emergent Complexity could produce all human behaviours in Robots—
Once you have a Viable Set of Axiomatic Rules to Work From.
Could these come about from The Thread of Natureal Evolution?
That’s another Stretch.
Another Sliver where A Little Fudging is Necessary.
Of course; Human Existence would seem to require a constant stream of these interventions.
Granted; Most people, Most of The Time, would not require any oversight.
Most people, Most of The Time; Are on AutoPilot. They are mindless Robots.
Most people i know have never uttered an original sentence, or suggested an original idea.
They usually seem to be experiencing a form of Consciousness very different from The Kind that i believe i am experiencing.
But This argument isn’t dependent upon Everyone being Genuinely Locally Autonomous, with Genuine Freewill; It only presupposes that there is at least one case.
This is called Solipsism.
- - End : Intelligent Determinism Rant- - - - -
Various Marginally Edited Chaotic Thoughts
by Wanda Louise Campbell
This ( Half Baked ) Proof for Freewill brings to mind The Cartoon by Sidney Harris
In which The Distinguished Professor is Standing before A Blackboard;
One side of which is covered with Incomprehensible Calculations
& The Other side of The Board is Also covered with Complex Equations,
And between them—
The Professor has scrawled; ‘And then A Miracle Occurs’.
It has recently occurred to me What Miracle for Freewill is Required,
And How it may be Presented.
The Problem of Freewill is fairly easy to Outline.
The Universe as we experience it; Is Governed by A Orderly Structure which is routinely referred to as Cause & Effect.
This is also thought of as Determinism.
The Problem for Freewill is that if The Decisions that we Make are answerable to Cause & Effect, That pretty much nullifies Freewill.
One Solution is Introduce Quantum Mechanics and suggest that Randomality plays a part in our Decision making, But That nullifies Freewill as well.
Freewill requires that there is ‘Deliberate Intent’ that is Directed by An Autonomous Agent.
Regretfully; There are no examples of this that may be Examined or Verified,
Other than our own insistence that we’re doing it all The Time.
But our Brains; The Source of Our Minds, is made up of Chemicals in little bags, that are pushed around by tiny static charges that get their instructions from How The Universe Works.
Some Featherless Parakeets would like to believe that Our Minds are actually Ghosts that are trapped inside The Robots that we Call People. As such; The Ghost’s make all of our Autonomous Decisions— But there is a small problem with this.
This model simply pushes The Mechanics of Decision making out of The Mechanical Claws of The Meat Bags, Into The Fluffy Paws of some Spiritual Realm that must be :
Either Orderly or Disorderly; Just like The Physical Realm.
One Feeble Solution is to simply assert that The World we Perceive is Not The True Reality, And that The True Reality is So Very Different from Our Perceived Reality, That These Dichotomies of Order & Randomality, That we are sure are UnAvoidable— Are Illusions.
The True Reality; Which is forever Unknowable to us;
Has a very simple solution for how Freewill, Consciousness & Local Autonomy really work.
First:
Let us Define our Terms a little.
While Freewill & Local Autonomy may be Illusions.
We really do ( ? - Don’t we ) Experience Consciousness.
It may be that This Consciousness doesn’t do anything,
As; If all our thoughts are generated by The Mind ( Either within Our Brains or Souls )
and Then Experienced by our Consciousnesses, The Consciousness doesn’t have anything to do with Creating Those Thoughts, It only Experiences them.
That would be very annoying.
Let us attack this dilemma from a different direction.
One things that very much disturbs me; Is that there is Order in The Universe.
Why isn’t The Universe Random?
The most troubling thing about An Orderly Universe;
Is: Why Are All The Electrons Exactly The Same as One Another?
Granted; We’re making a lot of assumptions here, Principally about our understanding of matter & such— But Starting with The Elemental Axiom that The World is Pretty Much The Way we Experience it; Then: Where are all these Electrons getting their Instructions from; To all behave in exactly The Same Way?
This is so troubling that i’m going to jump past it.
Let us allow that there is something like; ‘The Bottom of The Universe’.
This has variously been called;
The Dao, Prana, Mana, Qi, The Holy Ghost, Odic Forcem, Morphic Fields, The Standard Model + Gravity, The Kitchen Floor, Yesod, The Akasha Pasture;
or The Ξ.0 Continuum.
It is Ruled over by The Troll Queen.
For what purpose; That is Another Wonderful Question.
But let us allow that this Kitchen Floor exists;
And from it; The One Tiniest Peanut is Multiplied to Fill The Universe,
And By Some Miraculous Rule that Governs it; It forms Quarks & Leptons,
Which combine to make Electrons & Neutrons & Photons & Such...
And They Follow Their Instructions which we call Physics & Chemistry.
From here; This modest Beginning—
i find it quite reasonable that Atoms would form,
Combine into most of The Elements,
And from these building blocks, The Visible Universe, At its largest Scale,
Would quite reasonably form Stars, Burst into Blazing Furnaces,
and find themselves surrounded with dense clouds of debris,
some of which may be thought of as Planets.
Water may collect on some of them;
And Its still reasonable that The Simple Principles of Chemistry
Could make Self Replicating Molecules.
But.
Just how much Complexity am i willing to allow this to proceed towards before i start to question just how much Intricacy can come from A Single Initial Premise,
Without any additional fudging?
Given any set of Rules; i am willing to allow that Complexity will -Always- Result—
But = this = Reality.
This one ?
Did it;
Could it have Resulted from A Single Initial Starting Point,
Countless Zillions of Years Ago,
Proceeding forward,
Tripping one Domino after another,
until… This ?
That seems improbable doesn’t it?
There is An Argument that puts a quick Kibosh on this hesitance to believe In The Evolutionist’s ‘Dead’ Universe;
And It simple states that in An Infinite Universe, That tries every imaginable combination of These Tiniest Peanuts; You will not only eventually come across A Visible Universe that is Exactly like this one; One with All The Wars, Art, Video Games, Sexual Perversions & Dinosaurs;
But There will be An Infinite number of them.
Not just a lot of them, But An Uncountable number of them.
But this argument is trying to find a way to understand,
Or at least allow for Freewill.
So far, It’s not going well.
But.
i would like you to consider this.
What if only possible things were possible.
This is quite different from; Anything is Possible, or worse; Everything is Possible.
I’ve always been very skeptical of The Assertion that There is Another Universe Exactly like this one; Except for one Tiny Detail.
It seems to me; That if This Duplicate Universe that was Exactly like this Universe for several billions of years, and then some small thing changes.
That would be breaking The Rules.
If this is correct.
If only Possible things are Possible;
Then There may be an Equally Infinite Number of Universes, But not Every Universe.
Then if you have a Very Improbable Universe; Like this one—
Maybe its not Inevitable.
Maybe it couldn’t just come about accidentally.
Maybe There would have to be some Fudging to keep it moving in some desired direction.
This model doesn’t say that this Fudging is caused by Gawd,
Or any intelligent entity at all.
It’s open ended on that point.
It is suggesting that along with The Kinds of Determinism that We’re familiar with,
There is another kind of Determinism.
It works just like The Dominoes Determinism,
But it can look a little bit into The Future, and by Some Unspecified Mechanism;
Pick which Domino to Knock over,
Because, for whatever reasons, It seems more desirable.
This Theory is Severely Incomplete.
But if only Possible Things Are Possible;
Then Some Improbable Realities are Actually Impossible,
Unless something pushes in from The Side and Make Impossible things happen.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A Divergent Collection of Scribbled Ideas
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-2 Empty Universe
-1 Randomality - ( In an Infinite Universe; This World / Visible Universe ( Expanding or Static Bubble of Our Reality ) - or - ( Our Perceptions of This Reality ( or My Perceptions in A Solipsistic Universe, of This Reality ) / Must ( ? ) Necessarily ( ? ) Come about, Not just once, but an Infinite Number of Times, with Infinite Variation ) !
0 Order / The Kitchen Floor
1 Fundamental Particles / Enables All Electrons to Be The Same
2 Physics / Chemistry / Easily Allows for A Universe filled with Atoms, Forces, Gravity, Light, Collapsing Stars, Planets & Even Self Replicating Molecules.
But if Occam’s Razor has any truth to it, Then instead of life evolving from this amazing chemical effect, The Oceans should have instead filled with a Gelatinous Muck that would have made further Evolution ImPossible.
2.5 Emergent Complexity / Emergent Complexity necessitates that some fundamental rules are developed first, and from these, their combinations provide for astonishing results which often appear to exhibit genuine intelligence. But where did The first rules come from, and how complex were they?
What are The Elemental Rules that Emergent Complexity is Constructed from, To Create The Contemporaneous World / Or Our Perceptions of It.
3 Intelligent Determinism / Intelligent Determinism is posited to allow that A World as we are familiar with it, would come into being by some mechanism other than as a randomly evolving clock-work toy.
At some ( UnDisclosed ) Point in The Natural Development of The Contemporaneous World as We Perceive It, The Complexity of It Defies The Clock-Work Explanation.
An Alternative to Intelligent Determinism ( ? or Is it exactly The Same ? ) is that The Fundamental Physics of The World, Created The First Rules, Which Allowed Emergent Complexity to Kick In, Which then produced An Intelligent Determinism, But this remains within The Realm of The Clock-Work Toy.
True Intelligent Determinism Suggests that This is A Distinguishable Form of Determinism from The Clock-Work Variety.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Pulled off The Interweb :
With no evidence of intelligent life other than ourselves, it appears that the process of starting with a star and ending with "advanced explosive lasting life" must be unlikely. This implies that at least one step in this process must be improbable. Hanson's list, while incomplete, describes the following nine steps in an "evolutionary path" that results in the colonization of the observable universe:
1. The right star system (including organics & potentially habitable planets)
2. Reproductive molecules (e.g. RNA)
3. Simple (prokaryotic) single-cell life
4. Complex (archaeatic & eukaryotic) single-cell life
5. Sexual reproduction
6. Multi-cell life
7. Tool-using animals with big brains
8. Where we are now
9. Colonization explosion
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Curious Thing about my Argument for The Necessary Intervention of A Determinant Determinism to Fudge The Ordinary Progression of Determinism,
( See xy Complexity Chart Above )
i am only troubled by a couple fine slivers along The Natureal History of This Reality.
i am fully comfortable in An Orderly Universe with Physics & Chemistry
And Stars forming,
And Planets with Oceans,
And Self Replicating Molecules,
And Then one of these Slivers appear,
And then Once There are Oceans full of Prokaryotes,
That seems perfectly reasonable,
Until They Develop into Nucleated Cells with DNA,
Which is Huge Stretch.
There are just too many layers of Cellular Mechanics that all have to work together from The First Step.
So that would be The Second Sliver.
And Then Multicellular Animals.
What is now known; All The Animals that Suddenly appeared during The PreCambrian Explosion of Life, All came from One Fully Formed Animal. It is now known that The Eyes in Insects & People didn’t Evolve Independently. Our Common Ancestor had Eyes.
It must have been a fully formed, Sexually Reproducing Animal.
Where did it come from?
Once you have all These Animals though; The Reigning Explanation of how They Mixed together to form all these other animals is quite elegant and believable.
But once these animals became a little bit pickier about allowing only sperms from their own species to fertilize their eggs, You’ve got problems again.
Every Time a New Species comes into existence, with it’s own unique number of chromosomes, you have to have several of them. You can’t just have one mutation, It has to be a bunch all at once.
But then if you jump way ahead to A Fully Functional Featherless Parakeet,
i am perfectly willing to allow that you could have a planet of Consciousless Robots that behave -Exactly- The way we do.
i am perfectly willing to allow that Emergent Complexity could produce all human behaviours in Robots—
Once you have a Viable Set of Axiomatic Rules to Work From.
Could these come about from The Thread of Natureal Evolution?
That’s another Stretch.
Another Sliver where A Little Fudging is Necessary.
Of course; Human Existence would seem to require a constant stream of these interventions.
Granted; Most people, Most of The Time, would not require any oversight.
Most people, Most of The Time; Are on AutoPilot. They are mindless Robots.
Most people i know have never uttered an original sentence, or suggested an original idea.
They usually seem to be experiencing a form of Consciousness very different from The Kind that i believe i am experiencing.
But This argument isn’t dependent upon Everyone being Genuinely Locally Autonomous, with Genuine Freewill; It only presupposes that there is at least one case.
This is called Solipsism.
- - End : Intelligent Determinism Rant- - - - -
Guillible Skeptics vs Epistemologists
The Principle Difference between
The Gullible Skeptic & The Genuinely Critical Epistemologists
Is The One is Chiefly Concerned with Providing Authoritative Answers,
And The Other is Only Motivated to Forming Provocative Questions.
The Gullible Skeptic & The Genuinely Critical Epistemologists
Is The One is Chiefly Concerned with Providing Authoritative Answers,
And The Other is Only Motivated to Forming Provocative Questions.
Near Sighted People See Blurred Images
A Very Raw Observation
i just realized The Other Day that people with Near or Far Sightedness,
See Blurry Images !
This strikes me as rather odd, in that it seems to me that The Brain should take in information from The Eyes, and if The Image is Blurred, The Interpretation is Going to be Flawed, But not so much that The Correct Identification of Items in your Visual Field will be Wrong,
So The Problem that i’m having with this is; The Brain takes in all this information, in The Form of Raw Pixels, which have to be thoroughly processed to be Identified, And then Processed in some Deeply Mysterious Way to Form The Conscious Representation of The Visual Field of ‘Things We See”.
Why then; Would This Visual Representation be ‘Created’ from Items that were Properly Identified, As Blurry Objects?
It must be That we’re ‘Seeing’ The Raw Image provided by The Eyes.
This Seems to leave The Brain out at some critical step.
( ? )
i just realized The Other Day that people with Near or Far Sightedness,
See Blurry Images !
This strikes me as rather odd, in that it seems to me that The Brain should take in information from The Eyes, and if The Image is Blurred, The Interpretation is Going to be Flawed, But not so much that The Correct Identification of Items in your Visual Field will be Wrong,
So The Problem that i’m having with this is; The Brain takes in all this information, in The Form of Raw Pixels, which have to be thoroughly processed to be Identified, And then Processed in some Deeply Mysterious Way to Form The Conscious Representation of The Visual Field of ‘Things We See”.
Why then; Would This Visual Representation be ‘Created’ from Items that were Properly Identified, As Blurry Objects?
It must be That we’re ‘Seeing’ The Raw Image provided by The Eyes.
This Seems to leave The Brain out at some critical step.
( ? )
Friday, July 15, 2011
Recent News Items
More nonsense about Bin Laden in The News.
Today’s News brings us again Principally Grandiose Plans That Bin Laden was Planning, But That in The 10 years since 911, None of them were Actualized.
If Bin Laden really was The Head of a Well Funded World Wide Criminal Organization with Thousands or Millions of members,
Why was it so Ineffectual?
- -
All The Supposed ‘Attempted Attacks’ with Explosive Underwear or Shoes or Christmas Trees, were all comical in their disclosed details, which invariably included all The Information that an Attentive 5th Grader should need to put it together to conclude that they were intended to be a joke, But astonishingly; Few People ‘got The joke’ ( ??? )
Just how stupid are people?
- -
Doesn’t it make more sense that it’s all a hoax?
That there is no Al Qaeda, That Bin Laden was just an anachronism of The Russian War with Afghanistan, And was used as a figure head by The United State’s CIA or Whoever, to Create a Boogey Man.
All those tapes & Videos, of astonishingly poor quality, that were supposed to have been of Bin Laden, always contained elements that were just ‘Wrong’. They always contained Grandiose claims made after The fact, & The Figures identified as Bin Laden never looked like Bin Laden.
It’s like 911 itself; As if The people that Created these events deliberately included elements that should ’Tip Off’ Any attentive 5th Grader that it’s a Hoax.
If these things were created by people that actually wanted to perpetrate a Believeable Hoax, they would not contain so many flaws.
It would seem to be somekind of crazy experiment to see how silly they can be, and still get 80% of The Populace to believe it.
- -
More news :
Balancing The Budget.
This is going to be a Massive Train Wreck somewhere down The line.
i just do not understand how The Economy Works.
i don’t understand how most small businesses survive. Most little stores that i pass by every day, never have any customers in them. And this includes most of The stores at The mall. Maybe most people shop late at night, when i’m hiding under a stack of blankets in my closet, But how can they do enough business to make a few pennies off each item sold, to pay a clerk minimum wage every day ?
This deeply mystifies me.
And while it does make a little sense to me that if i buy something on credit, i owe The bank x amount and they are willing to let it slide for any length of time, while adding a little something to it for every day that goes by.
But how does a government rack up trillions of dollars in debt?
Who is taking these loans?
If China is buying up all our debt, Where are they getting all this surplus money?
All this money that The US is borrowing, has to be paid someday, with interest.
When is this going to happen?
At what time in The future, under what circumstances, will The US Catch Up ?
- -
And something that i haven’t heard anyone discussing, and it’s something that i think is an absolute Certainty, Is that someday, Someday soon, someone is going to break The AI puzzle. And when an artificial brain or Synthetic Consciousness becomes available, It will mean that all Middle Management Positions will become obsolete overnight. Unemployment will jump form 9% to 90%.
And when you add on Robots that can Do anything, there will be almost no Jobs that humans will do better than machines.
Is anyone thinking about how an Economy will work after this comes into play?
Will it suddenly be a utopian paradise or complete anarchy.
Today’s News brings us again Principally Grandiose Plans That Bin Laden was Planning, But That in The 10 years since 911, None of them were Actualized.
If Bin Laden really was The Head of a Well Funded World Wide Criminal Organization with Thousands or Millions of members,
Why was it so Ineffectual?
- -
All The Supposed ‘Attempted Attacks’ with Explosive Underwear or Shoes or Christmas Trees, were all comical in their disclosed details, which invariably included all The Information that an Attentive 5th Grader should need to put it together to conclude that they were intended to be a joke, But astonishingly; Few People ‘got The joke’ ( ??? )
Just how stupid are people?
- -
Doesn’t it make more sense that it’s all a hoax?
That there is no Al Qaeda, That Bin Laden was just an anachronism of The Russian War with Afghanistan, And was used as a figure head by The United State’s CIA or Whoever, to Create a Boogey Man.
All those tapes & Videos, of astonishingly poor quality, that were supposed to have been of Bin Laden, always contained elements that were just ‘Wrong’. They always contained Grandiose claims made after The fact, & The Figures identified as Bin Laden never looked like Bin Laden.
It’s like 911 itself; As if The people that Created these events deliberately included elements that should ’Tip Off’ Any attentive 5th Grader that it’s a Hoax.
If these things were created by people that actually wanted to perpetrate a Believeable Hoax, they would not contain so many flaws.
It would seem to be somekind of crazy experiment to see how silly they can be, and still get 80% of The Populace to believe it.
- -
More news :
Balancing The Budget.
This is going to be a Massive Train Wreck somewhere down The line.
i just do not understand how The Economy Works.
i don’t understand how most small businesses survive. Most little stores that i pass by every day, never have any customers in them. And this includes most of The stores at The mall. Maybe most people shop late at night, when i’m hiding under a stack of blankets in my closet, But how can they do enough business to make a few pennies off each item sold, to pay a clerk minimum wage every day ?
This deeply mystifies me.
And while it does make a little sense to me that if i buy something on credit, i owe The bank x amount and they are willing to let it slide for any length of time, while adding a little something to it for every day that goes by.
But how does a government rack up trillions of dollars in debt?
Who is taking these loans?
If China is buying up all our debt, Where are they getting all this surplus money?
All this money that The US is borrowing, has to be paid someday, with interest.
When is this going to happen?
At what time in The future, under what circumstances, will The US Catch Up ?
- -
And something that i haven’t heard anyone discussing, and it’s something that i think is an absolute Certainty, Is that someday, Someday soon, someone is going to break The AI puzzle. And when an artificial brain or Synthetic Consciousness becomes available, It will mean that all Middle Management Positions will become obsolete overnight. Unemployment will jump form 9% to 90%.
And when you add on Robots that can Do anything, there will be almost no Jobs that humans will do better than machines.
Is anyone thinking about how an Economy will work after this comes into play?
Will it suddenly be a utopian paradise or complete anarchy.
Jaycee Lee Dugard
It seems to me that a reasonable defense for Philip Craig Garrido ( & His Wife Nancy Bocanegra ), The Kidnappers of Jaycee Lee Dugard ( Prisoner for 18y ) would be to assert that given that Jaycee has demonstrated such strength & resiliency, That her years under their care was a very positive experience for her, and was The very anti-thesis of criminal activity. They actually provided a more positive environment than if she was allowed to live in her ‘normal’ mediocre home with her parents.
Friday, July 08, 2011
Casey Anthony Rant ( + )
re : Casey & Kalyn ( ? ) Anthony
Despite The Astonishing Hand Wringing in The Few Days after The Surprising Verdict of Not Guilty, Very little Consideration has been Given to Some of The Most Vexing Questions. ( ? )
What is The Deal with The Google Searches for Chloroform?
Why Didn’t Casey’s Mother or Father or Brother Report Kalyn Missing?
It seems clear to me that there is A Larger Conspiracy in That Household.
Everyone in that home knew what happened to Kalyn, And they Conspired to Cover it Up.
Why?
If it was an Accident, Why cover it up?
It seems much more reasonable that someone in The Family Murdered Kalyn,
But why would The Other Members of The Family Go Along with The CoverUp.
What was The Motive for The Murder?
How could they have believed that No One Else would notice Kalyn Missing?
Why did her Mother Suddenly Report Her Missing?
What is The Larger Narrative?
Why is The Media Ignoring this Larger Narrative?
It seems to me that in Light of A Conspiracy Theory,
The Family would Support Casey, and Casey would support her Family after her Arrest, But after a time, Casey Decided that The Truth would be more Beneficial to Her Situation.
But.
When Casey decided to Tell The Truth, She would have to Translate The Larger Narrative into a Believable Story, And in doing so, She decided to Simplify A Larger Narrative which may be Insanely Complicated that Spanned Her Entire Life & The Lives of Her Family Members.
Then after you simplify one element and try to make it Fit with The Other Simplified Elements, you’d have to continuously bend & twist your story to get everything to fit makes it more & more disingenuous & contrived.
If Casey ever did want to ‘Back Up’ and Start The Simplified Narrative over again, it would only make it all worse, or if she decided to try and reveal The Larger Narrative, There is no way that she could get all The Details Right so that it would make a believable Story, because her understanding would be only one perspective with numerous other actor’s views & motivations unknown to her.
The Investigators would have to have first conceded that there was A Larger Narrative, But The Police are always looking for The Simple Murder, Not A College Graduate Thesis in The Complexities of Human Behaviour.
Plus; Even if this Larger Narrative were Fully Disclosed, How could they ever present it to A Jury to Get any kind of reasonable Conviction?
i have heard of other cases like this, Where a Crime involves a little extra Complexity, A Few Extra Details that are NonSensical or In any Sense Sensible, The Prosecutors &/or Judges simply throw The Case Out rather than think to hard about something that will only cause UnNecessary Grief & Headaches.
- -
As a Side Issue :
Hate Jury Duty...?
i have an idea for Restructuring The Judicial System, So that all the rights & responsibilities of the Accused & Accusers will be preserved, But that Citizens will be lining up to be on Juries, Instead of shunning them.
The first & most elemental assumption that i'm making about the functionality of a legal trial, is that it consists of an logical & reasonable argument of guilt by The Prosecutor, which is rebutted by The Defense Attorney.
What this Trial is Not; Is a Theatrical Performance.
The New & Improved Structure that i am proposing, May seem even more Theatrical than the current structure, but it is intended to provide more & clearer information in a more confined & well regulated format.
The New Structure is simply This:
All the principles of the case; Accused, Prosecutor, Defense, Judge, Witnesses & Various Experts conduct the trial in a manner very reminiscent of a conventional trial, With the tiny exception that instead of presenting it to A Live Jury; It is simply made into a full & complete Video Presentation.
What are the advantages to this:
* All parties have complete control of what the final presentation will consist of, disallowing or sharply reducing, the possibility of an appeal by either side.
* This complete control means that there will be No unexpected outbursts, irrelevant comments, pointless delays, & all other wearisome & tedious content for The Jury to Endure. / It may be argued that on various occasions, Either side of the debate would like to introduce what may appear to an unexpected outburst, but such theatrics will now have to be carefully argued at a meta-level with all concerned parties for their inclusion.
* Expert Witnesses may be Video Conferenced from Distant Locations, or Pre-Recorded Explanations of Evidentiary Content may be inserted seamlessly into the final Presentation.
* Detailed Examinations of The Crime Scene may be included with fancy Graphics & detailed computer simulations. / These sorts of things are present in current legal proceedings, but only in the most contrived & often clumsy manner.
* These Video Presentation Arguments will be created by professionals working with all interested parties to make a final, professional looking product that will contain all relevant information, disallow irrelevant information and be pleasing & engaging to watch.
* The Jury may view the entire Presentation or any subsection repeatedly.
* The amount of time that The Jury would have to commit to the Trial may be as little as a single afternoon. / Or conceivably; They could view The Presentation from home and deliberate with other jury members within a Secured Chat Room.
* The Presentation would be available for review by anyone, in it's complete form, for reconsideration, appeal or historical purposes at any later time.
- -
Additional Digression :
Prosecutorial Responsibilities
For every trial by jury or judge;
The jury or judge could find the accused overwhelmingly innocent,
which would be the other side of The Scottish ‘Not Proved’. ( Also an Option )
When a verdict of Overwhelmingly Innocent is reached;
The jury would then find The Prosecutor guilty of Malfeasance,
And then assess a suitable punishment while all the facts of the trial are still fresh in their minds.
If the accused is found merely innocent;
A Misdemeanor fine could be levied against the prosecutor, at the juries discretion.
- -
More Digressing :
Why i would never serve on A Jury
There are layers & layers of kookiness when it comes to Our Judicial System.
The First & Foremost is that Moral Responsibility, Which is Necessary to be Judged for One's Misbehavior, Requires FreeWill, Which is Logically Impossible.
If This Reasoning; In Support of The Illusion of Freewill is Flawed, Then A System of Justice that prides itself on Logical Thinking & Protocols, Is Flawed for Using this Illusionary Foundation of Reason.
If; Contrary to This : The Judicial System is based on Mere Vengeance, Then it is Unconscionable, And i can not be Party to it.
If Likewise; Freewill is An Illusion, The Very Thinking of it as an Illusion, is an Illusion as Well, Since this Reasoning does not Exist. It is merely a long chain of Cause & Effect, Perpetrated on ElectroChemical Processes within The Brain, Each Step, Decided by The Fundamental Rules of Electrons, Billions or More, years ago.
But if this is True, As Well— Then All The Charades of The Judicial System are not performed out of Mischievious Ignorance or Malfeasance; But because all of it's actions were likewise decided Billions, or More, Years ago at a point in The Fabric of Reality when Randomality gave way to Determinism.
In Summary:
If There is No Freewill; Then The Judicial System is Grossly Unfair to The Robots it Persecutes.
Or— If There is Freewill; While our Foundations of Logic clearly refute this Condition, Then This Same Foundation of Logic which The Judicial System is Based on, Or Not, Is Deeply Flawed and is Grossly Unfair to The Fallen, Wingless Angels that were Raised in a Culture that is Devoid of A Rational System of Thought to Teach Them Moral Righteousness.
- -
More of The Same :
More Evidence that Logic is Bunk!
In the One Venue in which Logic & Reasoning really should have been actively codified to exclude all Irrational Thinking...
Has Not Done So.
The Judiciary.
You might want to believe that Prosecutors construct Logical Arguments that Convict Innocent Parakeets, But the very fact that all Preliminary Avenues of Reasoning between The Prosecution & Defense is Terminated with The Assemblage of 12 Ill Educated & Proven Sociopaths to Arbitrarily Decide if The Accused is Guilty or Not.
If it were The Case that Western Civilization had a Viable Fractional Propositional Logical System; The Process would consist of The Police &/or Private Investigators presenting their evidence for someone's guilt to a Municipal Judiciary, Which would then take a Prosecutor from Their List of Authorized Barristers, And if Necessary; A Defense Attorney as well. Then The Prosecutor & The Investigators would go over the evidence And Construct Their Argument. The Defense would Then come along and debate the construction of The Argument, As well as The Assigned Truth Values for All Applicable Variables.
A Independent Judge would then Moderate The Final Fractional Propositional Argument; Which when Finished; Would reveal If The Accused is Agreeably Guilty or Not.
The Actual Value for Acceptable Guilt may Vary from County to County.
The Argument & All Other Particulars would then be posted on The Interweb for All to Examine— And at That Point; A Jury of The Totality would determine if The Prosecution of The Accused Was Fair or Not.
- -
Random Thoughts :
Judged by a Jury of Your Peers
Has there ever been a case in which, or criteria defined, to actually exclude someone from a jury because they are Not a Peer of The accused?
- -
Despite The Astonishing Hand Wringing in The Few Days after The Surprising Verdict of Not Guilty, Very little Consideration has been Given to Some of The Most Vexing Questions. ( ? )
What is The Deal with The Google Searches for Chloroform?
Why Didn’t Casey’s Mother or Father or Brother Report Kalyn Missing?
It seems clear to me that there is A Larger Conspiracy in That Household.
Everyone in that home knew what happened to Kalyn, And they Conspired to Cover it Up.
Why?
If it was an Accident, Why cover it up?
It seems much more reasonable that someone in The Family Murdered Kalyn,
But why would The Other Members of The Family Go Along with The CoverUp.
What was The Motive for The Murder?
How could they have believed that No One Else would notice Kalyn Missing?
Why did her Mother Suddenly Report Her Missing?
What is The Larger Narrative?
Why is The Media Ignoring this Larger Narrative?
It seems to me that in Light of A Conspiracy Theory,
The Family would Support Casey, and Casey would support her Family after her Arrest, But after a time, Casey Decided that The Truth would be more Beneficial to Her Situation.
But.
When Casey decided to Tell The Truth, She would have to Translate The Larger Narrative into a Believable Story, And in doing so, She decided to Simplify A Larger Narrative which may be Insanely Complicated that Spanned Her Entire Life & The Lives of Her Family Members.
Then after you simplify one element and try to make it Fit with The Other Simplified Elements, you’d have to continuously bend & twist your story to get everything to fit makes it more & more disingenuous & contrived.
If Casey ever did want to ‘Back Up’ and Start The Simplified Narrative over again, it would only make it all worse, or if she decided to try and reveal The Larger Narrative, There is no way that she could get all The Details Right so that it would make a believable Story, because her understanding would be only one perspective with numerous other actor’s views & motivations unknown to her.
The Investigators would have to have first conceded that there was A Larger Narrative, But The Police are always looking for The Simple Murder, Not A College Graduate Thesis in The Complexities of Human Behaviour.
Plus; Even if this Larger Narrative were Fully Disclosed, How could they ever present it to A Jury to Get any kind of reasonable Conviction?
i have heard of other cases like this, Where a Crime involves a little extra Complexity, A Few Extra Details that are NonSensical or In any Sense Sensible, The Prosecutors &/or Judges simply throw The Case Out rather than think to hard about something that will only cause UnNecessary Grief & Headaches.
- -
As a Side Issue :
Hate Jury Duty...?
i have an idea for Restructuring The Judicial System, So that all the rights & responsibilities of the Accused & Accusers will be preserved, But that Citizens will be lining up to be on Juries, Instead of shunning them.
The first & most elemental assumption that i'm making about the functionality of a legal trial, is that it consists of an logical & reasonable argument of guilt by The Prosecutor, which is rebutted by The Defense Attorney.
What this Trial is Not; Is a Theatrical Performance.
The New & Improved Structure that i am proposing, May seem even more Theatrical than the current structure, but it is intended to provide more & clearer information in a more confined & well regulated format.
The New Structure is simply This:
All the principles of the case; Accused, Prosecutor, Defense, Judge, Witnesses & Various Experts conduct the trial in a manner very reminiscent of a conventional trial, With the tiny exception that instead of presenting it to A Live Jury; It is simply made into a full & complete Video Presentation.
What are the advantages to this:
* All parties have complete control of what the final presentation will consist of, disallowing or sharply reducing, the possibility of an appeal by either side.
* This complete control means that there will be No unexpected outbursts, irrelevant comments, pointless delays, & all other wearisome & tedious content for The Jury to Endure. / It may be argued that on various occasions, Either side of the debate would like to introduce what may appear to an unexpected outburst, but such theatrics will now have to be carefully argued at a meta-level with all concerned parties for their inclusion.
* Expert Witnesses may be Video Conferenced from Distant Locations, or Pre-Recorded Explanations of Evidentiary Content may be inserted seamlessly into the final Presentation.
* Detailed Examinations of The Crime Scene may be included with fancy Graphics & detailed computer simulations. / These sorts of things are present in current legal proceedings, but only in the most contrived & often clumsy manner.
* These Video Presentation Arguments will be created by professionals working with all interested parties to make a final, professional looking product that will contain all relevant information, disallow irrelevant information and be pleasing & engaging to watch.
* The Jury may view the entire Presentation or any subsection repeatedly.
* The amount of time that The Jury would have to commit to the Trial may be as little as a single afternoon. / Or conceivably; They could view The Presentation from home and deliberate with other jury members within a Secured Chat Room.
* The Presentation would be available for review by anyone, in it's complete form, for reconsideration, appeal or historical purposes at any later time.
- -
Additional Digression :
Prosecutorial Responsibilities
For every trial by jury or judge;
The jury or judge could find the accused overwhelmingly innocent,
which would be the other side of The Scottish ‘Not Proved’. ( Also an Option )
When a verdict of Overwhelmingly Innocent is reached;
The jury would then find The Prosecutor guilty of Malfeasance,
And then assess a suitable punishment while all the facts of the trial are still fresh in their minds.
If the accused is found merely innocent;
A Misdemeanor fine could be levied against the prosecutor, at the juries discretion.
- -
More Digressing :
Why i would never serve on A Jury
There are layers & layers of kookiness when it comes to Our Judicial System.
The First & Foremost is that Moral Responsibility, Which is Necessary to be Judged for One's Misbehavior, Requires FreeWill, Which is Logically Impossible.
If This Reasoning; In Support of The Illusion of Freewill is Flawed, Then A System of Justice that prides itself on Logical Thinking & Protocols, Is Flawed for Using this Illusionary Foundation of Reason.
If; Contrary to This : The Judicial System is based on Mere Vengeance, Then it is Unconscionable, And i can not be Party to it.
If Likewise; Freewill is An Illusion, The Very Thinking of it as an Illusion, is an Illusion as Well, Since this Reasoning does not Exist. It is merely a long chain of Cause & Effect, Perpetrated on ElectroChemical Processes within The Brain, Each Step, Decided by The Fundamental Rules of Electrons, Billions or More, years ago.
But if this is True, As Well— Then All The Charades of The Judicial System are not performed out of Mischievious Ignorance or Malfeasance; But because all of it's actions were likewise decided Billions, or More, Years ago at a point in The Fabric of Reality when Randomality gave way to Determinism.
In Summary:
If There is No Freewill; Then The Judicial System is Grossly Unfair to The Robots it Persecutes.
Or— If There is Freewill; While our Foundations of Logic clearly refute this Condition, Then This Same Foundation of Logic which The Judicial System is Based on, Or Not, Is Deeply Flawed and is Grossly Unfair to The Fallen, Wingless Angels that were Raised in a Culture that is Devoid of A Rational System of Thought to Teach Them Moral Righteousness.
- -
More of The Same :
More Evidence that Logic is Bunk!
In the One Venue in which Logic & Reasoning really should have been actively codified to exclude all Irrational Thinking...
Has Not Done So.
The Judiciary.
You might want to believe that Prosecutors construct Logical Arguments that Convict Innocent Parakeets, But the very fact that all Preliminary Avenues of Reasoning between The Prosecution & Defense is Terminated with The Assemblage of 12 Ill Educated & Proven Sociopaths to Arbitrarily Decide if The Accused is Guilty or Not.
If it were The Case that Western Civilization had a Viable Fractional Propositional Logical System; The Process would consist of The Police &/or Private Investigators presenting their evidence for someone's guilt to a Municipal Judiciary, Which would then take a Prosecutor from Their List of Authorized Barristers, And if Necessary; A Defense Attorney as well. Then The Prosecutor & The Investigators would go over the evidence And Construct Their Argument. The Defense would Then come along and debate the construction of The Argument, As well as The Assigned Truth Values for All Applicable Variables.
A Independent Judge would then Moderate The Final Fractional Propositional Argument; Which when Finished; Would reveal If The Accused is Agreeably Guilty or Not.
The Actual Value for Acceptable Guilt may Vary from County to County.
The Argument & All Other Particulars would then be posted on The Interweb for All to Examine— And at That Point; A Jury of The Totality would determine if The Prosecution of The Accused Was Fair or Not.
- -
Random Thoughts :
Judged by a Jury of Your Peers
Has there ever been a case in which, or criteria defined, to actually exclude someone from a jury because they are Not a Peer of The accused?
- -
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
An Assortment of FreeWill Rants that have Been Piling Up.
Book Report
( i actually proofread this one a little )
Fate, Time & Language
An Essay on Free Will
© 2011
An Anthology of Essays from:
Fatalism by Richard Taylor
With Responses by:
John Turk Saunders, Peter Makepeace, Bruce Aune, Raziel Abelson, Richard Sharvy, Steven Cahn & Charles D. Brown
Terminating with An Essay by David Foster Wallace
“Richard Taylor’s “Fatalism” and The Semantics of Physical Modality
Edited by Steven M. Cahn & Maureen Eckert
With An Meandering Introduction by James Ryerson
And An Epilogue by Jay Garfield
i have for some time become more & more disillusioned by The Search for Deep Truths by ‘Philosophers’. Many idle thinkers prior to this have come to this conclusion quite some time ago; That philosophy is just a lot of hooey.
i have been holding out for some time, but this book is The Lynchpin of All Hooey.
The Initial Essay; By Richard Taylor; “Fatalism”
Which is built up as a major consideration for all deep philosophical thought, Consists of a brow beating to The very Simple Idea of Determinism;
If p Then q
The unique flavor of this argument, twists this around to suggest that p is either true or false ( Eliminating The Grey Area of Reality ) according To The Philosopher’s Law of The Excluded Middle.
i had some considerable difficulty after this first principle, as i have been developing my own Propositional Logic for many years that is based on A Fractional Continuum of Truth Values from 0 to 1.
This system requires a complete reworking of Propositional Operators that allows for The Use of AND, OR, XOR, IFT and so on, so that they can manipulate these fractional values.
Taylor’s Argument then goes on to assert that The Truth Value of p is dependent upon whether q turns out to be True or False at some Future Time.
( ! )
Then he twists this around some more in an attempt to create a dichotomy between whether or not this Law of The Excluded Middle ( Which he assumes to be a fundimental Axiom of Logic & Sound Reasoning ) or That Fatalism ( known to most of us as Determinism ) is Real.
His implied Conclusion ( Completely Unsupported by any Intervening Argument ) is that Fatalism is -Obviously- Wrong, Therefore This Presumed Premise, which can not be wrong ( ? ) is Wrong.
He seems to have attempted to have created an Argument by Absurdum, which he then proves his Absurd Conclusion, and then failed to show us why it’s Absurd.
What is so very annoying about this book is that Taylor’s whole argument is so silly and then The Authors & David Foster Wallace consider it so Serious & Important.
( sigh. )
In The Spirit of Full Disclosure,
i did not read The Entire Book.
i found The Introduction, which pretty much covered The Contents of The Entire Book so Tedious & Redundant, And Taylor’s Essay so Silly, that i only flipped through The Remainder of The Book.
If There was some deeply subtle idea concerning Freewill in any of these essays, They sorrowfully Neglected to Bring it or them to light.
My own idea of Fractional Propositional Logic is based on The Idea that while in some Cartoon Reality Occupied by Sherlock Holmes, Plato or Kant, They may insist that any given proposition must be either True or False.
This False Dichotomy is The Principle reason why Computers have been so Astonishingly Lame in Modeling Real World Problem Solving, because we can just Never Really Know if Some Statement (x is True or False.
i often use The Expression; As True as Elephants ( in Africa ).
Are there Elephants in Africa?
i believe that there are, But it’s entirely conceivable that there aren’t.
There might not even be an Africa. It could be that all The Books i’ve read on Africa were faked for some Nefarious Reason.
So i give The Statement that there are Elephants in Africa a Truth Value of .8 .
Most things that we encounter in our daily lives are True or False to a more certain degree, but there should always be some reasonable doubt.
If you’re going to construct a ‘Real World’ Argument Using Fractional Propositional Argument for The Guilt or Innocence of An Accused Murderer, Who Killed JFK, Who was behind 911 or Whether Flying Saucers are occupied by Aliens from Other Worlds;
The Problem is: How do you Initially Determine What The Truth Values should be for all of your Assumed Premises ? ( !!! )
The Solution that i would propose is to simply & entirely arbitrarily, give all these statements a Truth Value of .5 ( Completely Unknown ) And then let The Argument, as Worked through inside a Super Computer, Churn through it Recursively, Back & Forth, Round & Round, Changing these Values according to How Often & To What Degree The Other Statements believe that some Other Statement is True or False.
Ultimately; The Process will only find The Conclusion to be True to Some Fractional Value of Truth;
But i believe that this result would be considerably better than The Usual Way that People Decide if some Conclusion is True or Not,
Based on how Pleasant it is to Believe or Not.
,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,
A Methodology for Determining if FreeWill is Necessary
Premise:
Given a Simple Environment & One Rule,
How Much Complexity Could Conceivably be Created?
Since it seems to me that if we are living in a universe that actually is,
Pretty much as it seems to be - -
As Opposed to living in universe that is completely different than as it seems to be.
- - Then; Given that The Fundamental Unit of Reality must be just one thing ( ? )
( It seems to me that if there were two fundamental particles, then in order for them to interact, they would have to have common properties, and thus have parts. )
So that The Universe as we know it is The Result of just such a scenario.
One particle with One Rule.
Of course; Given that there must be a whole bunch of this one ( kind of ) particle, There would have to be some underlying substrata that tells all these particles to be exactly The Same.
What is this SubStrata made of?
Never mind that.
Is there some way to calculate how much complexity may result from a given number of Rules, and additionally measure The Complexity of These Rules,
And from that:
Determine how many Rules would be required to Produce this Reality.
The Question Being :
Does The Universe Contain more Complexity than The Number of Rules Warrant?
Another way of looking at this;
Given that The Universe must ( ? ) consist of a given number or structural rules,
Which allow The Fundamental Units of Matter or Energy or Forces,
To Make all of Our Familiar Leptons & Quarks, & Elements,
And Then These may combine to form Suns & Planets,
And possibly even Self Replicating Molecules - -
There is a problem ( ? ) at some point ( ? ) where The Complexity of The Universe,
Particularly in Any Fully Actualized Organic Environment
or Post Literate Culture of Sentient Beings - -
Become Too Complex for This Kind of Model of ( x ) Rules ?
It seems to me that it would indeed be Very Curious if The World,
As it is Observed,
Could be Created from a Fixed Number of Simple Rules.
Is it -More Reasonable- to simply Assume that There Exists a Different Kind of Determinism ( That we call Freewill ) ?
It has occurred to me previously that if you made a Common Fly, and tried to build into it, All The Rules of Behaviour that would be Necessary to make it behave like a Common Fly - -
A Better Example may be if you Substituted The Fly with a Bee or Ant )
- - Or Would it Be More Reasonable to Build into It, A Conscious Sentience that Could Act Appropriately to A Wide Variety of Unexpected Circumstances without trying to Incorporate All The Behavioural Routines in Neural Synapses that had to be Encoded into a limited number of DNA Shoelaces.
The AntiThesis to The Approach is that given ‘humanimals’ that are presupposed to possess Sentience, They Clearly Contradict this model of Consciousness that allows for Intelligent Behaviour without A Foundation of Built in Behavioural Instincts.
People just appear to be amazingly stupid in all The ways that this Cognitive Sentience Model is Supposed to Prevent.
This may be The Definitive Approach to Lots of Different Questions.
Is it more reasonable to assume that Magic explains ( x ) or Some Insanely Complex System of InDefensible NonSense ?
When it comes to Evolution, The Big Bang Theory or Quantum Mechanics, Biologists, Astronomers & Physicists are so Entrenched in their Pet Dogma that They are willing to Allow Their InDefensible NonSense to Take on Greater & Greater Tiers of Accumulative Silliness to Argue Against whatever Evidence is presented that Contradicts their Theories as they were defined a few moments before.
They simply refuse The Possibility of Either Magic or The Unknown.
At some point; Magic is The Least Crazy Alternative.
,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,
Free Will :
A Deterministic Universe...
Implies that Everything that is happening at any given point in time (x) is The consequence of An ( infinite & holistic ) Chain of Falling Dominoes that Preceded it.
This model means The Apparent Order & Structure of Our World was ( Decided ) at The Moment ( or AntiMoment ) of Creation.
-[ Very Improbable; But in An Infinite Universe, One would -Expect- a bubble appearing exactly like ours, not only eventually, but this exact ‘Universe’ occurring an Infinite Number of Times - - But still; It seems -wrong- because we believe that we have freewill, but this may be a consequence of our -real- experience of -conscious awareness- ! What is substantially less palatable though, is that while this Awareness is Real, We experience it only as observers, Not as Controllers. ]-
A Deterministic Universe, Whose Determinism Constructs The Laws of Physics
The First Scenario Implies that as A Line of ( Chaotic ( Deep Complexity ) ) Dominoes; There is No Structural Overview of This Process.
But of course; There -Must Be- Some Mechanical -Rules- That govern The Toppling Process. ( ? )
There is also ( Slight Digression ) The Side Issue that seems to be mislaid in these discussions; Why are all The Electrons in The Universe Exactly The Same?
This implies that they’re all getting their instructions from ( Where? ).
The Chinese Called it The Dao, And i call it The Kitchen Floor.
The Bottom of The Universe.
Where The True Reality Resides.
This Magical Realm decides what is really possible & impossible.
Asking Crazy Questions like : What is below The Kitchen Floor?
Is like asking, Who Broke that Vase?
or Why did they Cancel my Favorite TV Show?
End of Digression.
But This Option Considers that The Initial Determinism Constructs a More Expansive Physical Process, Which is then responsible for Allowing Stars to become Fusion Furnaces and even Chemistry to Produce Self Replicating Molecules.
This Strikes me as Rather Odd Though; In that This -Structural Orderliness- somehow side-steps The Purely Deterministic Universe by Applying A Blind Watchman.
If anything; It Implies that There May Be Determinism AND A Directional Force that Creates Order & Patterns, Albeit; A Blind & Deaf Gawd without Any Plans for Tomorrow.
If you’re going to allow that We are living in A Deterministic Universe,
That is Governed by The Most Elemental -Dominoes- Physics,
AND A Second Kind of ( Unique ) Structuralism that Gives Rise to A More Complex Collection of Physical Rules - -
AND We allow that -Awareness- & -Benign Consciousness- Are Real - -
THEN Is it so Unreasonable to allow for Still Another kind of Orderliness that gives rise to A Finer Structural Mechanism?
Granted; This Finer Layer of Structural Orderliness remains Completely Undefined & Unknown, But There is That Pesky Loose Shoe Lace of Consciousness that needs to be fitted into The Standard Model + Gravity.
If anything; This Crude Analysis suggests that There are Layers of Determinism.
?
Many Time Traveling Skiffy Stories Suggest that It is Possible to Go Back in Time and Change some Detail so that Event (A is Severely Altered or Eliminated, While The Events Surrounding it are Substantially NOT Changed !
i have always found this Analysis of Chronological Determinism rather ludicrous, as it defies my basic understanding of Domino Determinism.
If you change any, Any little thing at some point in Time, It is going to have Gigantic Chronological Effects to Everything down The Road.
But Now.
i am thinking that there is another kind of Determinism that certainly allows for this kind of ‘Small Changes Have No Effect’ Determinism.
The Easiest Example would be a Cloud of PreStellar Material that is Collapsing into a Solar System. If you could Duplicate this Cloud Exactly Several Dozen Times, And then Stir Up Each Copy, i would assert that each will then collapse into very Similar, Perhaps even Indistinguishable Versions.
The Kind of Star, The Number & Size of The Planets would be determined by Global Variances, and Depend very little on The Local Distribution of The Elements.
( ? )
While i allow that A Single Neuron that Discharges or Not may radically change future events, Would The Elimination of any Given Cell in your body change your future behaviour at all ?
While Every Particle in The Universe Effects ( Most Every Other ) Particle in The Universe; There are also likely to be Local Events that may seem to Causing Dramatic Global Events, Then be Washed Out or Diluted by Some Other Catastrophic Event that Much More Dramatically Changes Future Events, but Even this, May only Strongly Influence Relatively Local Events.
This still doesn’t explain or provide a model for Consciousness or Freewill,
But - -
It does continue to suggest that There are Numerous Distinct Layers, Tiers or Classes of Determinism.
,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,
( i actually proofread this one a little )
Fate, Time & Language
An Essay on Free Will
© 2011
An Anthology of Essays from:
Fatalism by Richard Taylor
With Responses by:
John Turk Saunders, Peter Makepeace, Bruce Aune, Raziel Abelson, Richard Sharvy, Steven Cahn & Charles D. Brown
Terminating with An Essay by David Foster Wallace
“Richard Taylor’s “Fatalism” and The Semantics of Physical Modality
Edited by Steven M. Cahn & Maureen Eckert
With An Meandering Introduction by James Ryerson
And An Epilogue by Jay Garfield
i have for some time become more & more disillusioned by The Search for Deep Truths by ‘Philosophers’. Many idle thinkers prior to this have come to this conclusion quite some time ago; That philosophy is just a lot of hooey.
i have been holding out for some time, but this book is The Lynchpin of All Hooey.
The Initial Essay; By Richard Taylor; “Fatalism”
Which is built up as a major consideration for all deep philosophical thought, Consists of a brow beating to The very Simple Idea of Determinism;
If p Then q
The unique flavor of this argument, twists this around to suggest that p is either true or false ( Eliminating The Grey Area of Reality ) according To The Philosopher’s Law of The Excluded Middle.
i had some considerable difficulty after this first principle, as i have been developing my own Propositional Logic for many years that is based on A Fractional Continuum of Truth Values from 0 to 1.
This system requires a complete reworking of Propositional Operators that allows for The Use of AND, OR, XOR, IFT and so on, so that they can manipulate these fractional values.
Taylor’s Argument then goes on to assert that The Truth Value of p is dependent upon whether q turns out to be True or False at some Future Time.
( ! )
Then he twists this around some more in an attempt to create a dichotomy between whether or not this Law of The Excluded Middle ( Which he assumes to be a fundimental Axiom of Logic & Sound Reasoning ) or That Fatalism ( known to most of us as Determinism ) is Real.
His implied Conclusion ( Completely Unsupported by any Intervening Argument ) is that Fatalism is -Obviously- Wrong, Therefore This Presumed Premise, which can not be wrong ( ? ) is Wrong.
He seems to have attempted to have created an Argument by Absurdum, which he then proves his Absurd Conclusion, and then failed to show us why it’s Absurd.
What is so very annoying about this book is that Taylor’s whole argument is so silly and then The Authors & David Foster Wallace consider it so Serious & Important.
( sigh. )
In The Spirit of Full Disclosure,
i did not read The Entire Book.
i found The Introduction, which pretty much covered The Contents of The Entire Book so Tedious & Redundant, And Taylor’s Essay so Silly, that i only flipped through The Remainder of The Book.
If There was some deeply subtle idea concerning Freewill in any of these essays, They sorrowfully Neglected to Bring it or them to light.
My own idea of Fractional Propositional Logic is based on The Idea that while in some Cartoon Reality Occupied by Sherlock Holmes, Plato or Kant, They may insist that any given proposition must be either True or False.
This False Dichotomy is The Principle reason why Computers have been so Astonishingly Lame in Modeling Real World Problem Solving, because we can just Never Really Know if Some Statement (x is True or False.
i often use The Expression; As True as Elephants ( in Africa ).
Are there Elephants in Africa?
i believe that there are, But it’s entirely conceivable that there aren’t.
There might not even be an Africa. It could be that all The Books i’ve read on Africa were faked for some Nefarious Reason.
So i give The Statement that there are Elephants in Africa a Truth Value of .8 .
Most things that we encounter in our daily lives are True or False to a more certain degree, but there should always be some reasonable doubt.
If you’re going to construct a ‘Real World’ Argument Using Fractional Propositional Argument for The Guilt or Innocence of An Accused Murderer, Who Killed JFK, Who was behind 911 or Whether Flying Saucers are occupied by Aliens from Other Worlds;
The Problem is: How do you Initially Determine What The Truth Values should be for all of your Assumed Premises ? ( !!! )
The Solution that i would propose is to simply & entirely arbitrarily, give all these statements a Truth Value of .5 ( Completely Unknown ) And then let The Argument, as Worked through inside a Super Computer, Churn through it Recursively, Back & Forth, Round & Round, Changing these Values according to How Often & To What Degree The Other Statements believe that some Other Statement is True or False.
Ultimately; The Process will only find The Conclusion to be True to Some Fractional Value of Truth;
But i believe that this result would be considerably better than The Usual Way that People Decide if some Conclusion is True or Not,
Based on how Pleasant it is to Believe or Not.
,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,
A Methodology for Determining if FreeWill is Necessary
Premise:
Given a Simple Environment & One Rule,
How Much Complexity Could Conceivably be Created?
Since it seems to me that if we are living in a universe that actually is,
Pretty much as it seems to be - -
As Opposed to living in universe that is completely different than as it seems to be.
- - Then; Given that The Fundamental Unit of Reality must be just one thing ( ? )
( It seems to me that if there were two fundamental particles, then in order for them to interact, they would have to have common properties, and thus have parts. )
So that The Universe as we know it is The Result of just such a scenario.
One particle with One Rule.
Of course; Given that there must be a whole bunch of this one ( kind of ) particle, There would have to be some underlying substrata that tells all these particles to be exactly The Same.
What is this SubStrata made of?
Never mind that.
Is there some way to calculate how much complexity may result from a given number of Rules, and additionally measure The Complexity of These Rules,
And from that:
Determine how many Rules would be required to Produce this Reality.
The Question Being :
Does The Universe Contain more Complexity than The Number of Rules Warrant?
Another way of looking at this;
Given that The Universe must ( ? ) consist of a given number or structural rules,
Which allow The Fundamental Units of Matter or Energy or Forces,
To Make all of Our Familiar Leptons & Quarks, & Elements,
And Then These may combine to form Suns & Planets,
And possibly even Self Replicating Molecules - -
There is a problem ( ? ) at some point ( ? ) where The Complexity of The Universe,
Particularly in Any Fully Actualized Organic Environment
or Post Literate Culture of Sentient Beings - -
Become Too Complex for This Kind of Model of ( x ) Rules ?
It seems to me that it would indeed be Very Curious if The World,
As it is Observed,
Could be Created from a Fixed Number of Simple Rules.
Is it -More Reasonable- to simply Assume that There Exists a Different Kind of Determinism ( That we call Freewill ) ?
It has occurred to me previously that if you made a Common Fly, and tried to build into it, All The Rules of Behaviour that would be Necessary to make it behave like a Common Fly - -
A Better Example may be if you Substituted The Fly with a Bee or Ant )
- - Or Would it Be More Reasonable to Build into It, A Conscious Sentience that Could Act Appropriately to A Wide Variety of Unexpected Circumstances without trying to Incorporate All The Behavioural Routines in Neural Synapses that had to be Encoded into a limited number of DNA Shoelaces.
The AntiThesis to The Approach is that given ‘humanimals’ that are presupposed to possess Sentience, They Clearly Contradict this model of Consciousness that allows for Intelligent Behaviour without A Foundation of Built in Behavioural Instincts.
People just appear to be amazingly stupid in all The ways that this Cognitive Sentience Model is Supposed to Prevent.
This may be The Definitive Approach to Lots of Different Questions.
Is it more reasonable to assume that Magic explains ( x ) or Some Insanely Complex System of InDefensible NonSense ?
When it comes to Evolution, The Big Bang Theory or Quantum Mechanics, Biologists, Astronomers & Physicists are so Entrenched in their Pet Dogma that They are willing to Allow Their InDefensible NonSense to Take on Greater & Greater Tiers of Accumulative Silliness to Argue Against whatever Evidence is presented that Contradicts their Theories as they were defined a few moments before.
They simply refuse The Possibility of Either Magic or The Unknown.
At some point; Magic is The Least Crazy Alternative.
,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,
Free Will :
A Deterministic Universe...
Implies that Everything that is happening at any given point in time (x) is The consequence of An ( infinite & holistic ) Chain of Falling Dominoes that Preceded it.
This model means The Apparent Order & Structure of Our World was ( Decided ) at The Moment ( or AntiMoment ) of Creation.
-[ Very Improbable; But in An Infinite Universe, One would -Expect- a bubble appearing exactly like ours, not only eventually, but this exact ‘Universe’ occurring an Infinite Number of Times - - But still; It seems -wrong- because we believe that we have freewill, but this may be a consequence of our -real- experience of -conscious awareness- ! What is substantially less palatable though, is that while this Awareness is Real, We experience it only as observers, Not as Controllers. ]-
A Deterministic Universe, Whose Determinism Constructs The Laws of Physics
The First Scenario Implies that as A Line of ( Chaotic ( Deep Complexity ) ) Dominoes; There is No Structural Overview of This Process.
But of course; There -Must Be- Some Mechanical -Rules- That govern The Toppling Process. ( ? )
There is also ( Slight Digression ) The Side Issue that seems to be mislaid in these discussions; Why are all The Electrons in The Universe Exactly The Same?
This implies that they’re all getting their instructions from ( Where? ).
The Chinese Called it The Dao, And i call it The Kitchen Floor.
The Bottom of The Universe.
Where The True Reality Resides.
This Magical Realm decides what is really possible & impossible.
Asking Crazy Questions like : What is below The Kitchen Floor?
Is like asking, Who Broke that Vase?
or Why did they Cancel my Favorite TV Show?
End of Digression.
But This Option Considers that The Initial Determinism Constructs a More Expansive Physical Process, Which is then responsible for Allowing Stars to become Fusion Furnaces and even Chemistry to Produce Self Replicating Molecules.
This Strikes me as Rather Odd Though; In that This -Structural Orderliness- somehow side-steps The Purely Deterministic Universe by Applying A Blind Watchman.
If anything; It Implies that There May Be Determinism AND A Directional Force that Creates Order & Patterns, Albeit; A Blind & Deaf Gawd without Any Plans for Tomorrow.
If you’re going to allow that We are living in A Deterministic Universe,
That is Governed by The Most Elemental -Dominoes- Physics,
AND A Second Kind of ( Unique ) Structuralism that Gives Rise to A More Complex Collection of Physical Rules - -
AND We allow that -Awareness- & -Benign Consciousness- Are Real - -
THEN Is it so Unreasonable to allow for Still Another kind of Orderliness that gives rise to A Finer Structural Mechanism?
Granted; This Finer Layer of Structural Orderliness remains Completely Undefined & Unknown, But There is That Pesky Loose Shoe Lace of Consciousness that needs to be fitted into The Standard Model + Gravity.
If anything; This Crude Analysis suggests that There are Layers of Determinism.
?
Many Time Traveling Skiffy Stories Suggest that It is Possible to Go Back in Time and Change some Detail so that Event (A is Severely Altered or Eliminated, While The Events Surrounding it are Substantially NOT Changed !
i have always found this Analysis of Chronological Determinism rather ludicrous, as it defies my basic understanding of Domino Determinism.
If you change any, Any little thing at some point in Time, It is going to have Gigantic Chronological Effects to Everything down The Road.
But Now.
i am thinking that there is another kind of Determinism that certainly allows for this kind of ‘Small Changes Have No Effect’ Determinism.
The Easiest Example would be a Cloud of PreStellar Material that is Collapsing into a Solar System. If you could Duplicate this Cloud Exactly Several Dozen Times, And then Stir Up Each Copy, i would assert that each will then collapse into very Similar, Perhaps even Indistinguishable Versions.
The Kind of Star, The Number & Size of The Planets would be determined by Global Variances, and Depend very little on The Local Distribution of The Elements.
( ? )
While i allow that A Single Neuron that Discharges or Not may radically change future events, Would The Elimination of any Given Cell in your body change your future behaviour at all ?
While Every Particle in The Universe Effects ( Most Every Other ) Particle in The Universe; There are also likely to be Local Events that may seem to Causing Dramatic Global Events, Then be Washed Out or Diluted by Some Other Catastrophic Event that Much More Dramatically Changes Future Events, but Even this, May only Strongly Influence Relatively Local Events.
This still doesn’t explain or provide a model for Consciousness or Freewill,
But - -
It does continue to suggest that There are Numerous Distinct Layers, Tiers or Classes of Determinism.
,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,
New Video on YouTube
i just posted a New Video on YouTube,
And typically, i try to use a sound track that matches the length of the video.
In this case; Rather than using one of the 'Stingers' provided by Apple,
i used a Tune by Count Basie, and Mentioned this in the notes;
And YouTube Caught it -Immediately- !
They sent me a letter and informed me that the tune was The Property of EMI Records
And Curiously, they let it slide, allowing me to use it !
That was pretty nice of them huh ! ( ! )
And typically, i try to use a sound track that matches the length of the video.
In this case; Rather than using one of the 'Stingers' provided by Apple,
i used a Tune by Count Basie, and Mentioned this in the notes;
And YouTube Caught it -Immediately- !
They sent me a letter and informed me that the tune was The Property of EMI Records
And Curiously, they let it slide, allowing me to use it !
That was pretty nice of them huh ! ( ! )
Friday, June 17, 2011
Missing Luggage / NightLine Program
Monday, June 13, 2011 11:42:37 PM
Nightline Program Title : Unclaimed Luggage : Bought & Sold
On Nightline tonight they had a piece on ‘Lost Luggage’
and while Nightline and other ‘news’ programs like this often get astonishingly worked up over celebrities or politicians that are caught in the most benign examples of ’Shenanigans’,
When they are faced with Grand Theft Larceny against The World’s Travelers, they treat it like a giant Joke !!!
What they should have explained is How Exactly The Airlines make a reasonable attempt to find the owners of The Luggage that they’ve misplaced...?
Just What is: ‘UnClaimed’ ?
How can people get off a plane and simply forget about their baggage filled with expensive clothes, jewelry or electronics?
Just what does the Airline expect the traveler to do to ‘Claim’ their misplaced Luggage?
This is so amazing evil !
This is simply more evidence that everyone about western civilization is completely wrong.
- -
i will try to be charitable here towards the airlines;
Considering that according to this report, a full 1% ( A Stupendously Gigantic Number, given the millions of people traveling by air every hour ) of the luggage that everyone now has to pay an extra $100 per bag for, is misplaced.
This is assuming that the tag that was ostensibly attached to the bag at the time of check in was somehow, by some means, innocent or malicious, was removed.
If the tag is still in place, the owner should be painfully easy to locate and return at the expense & all difficulties of the airline.
The Third possibility is that the tag on the bag is Not the Tag that was put there at Check In, or During Check In, The Tags were somehow mixed up with Other Tags of Other Passengers. Once this is discovered, the Bag would be considered as a Bag without a Tag.
There may be some ‘Encrypted’ ( ? ) information that may be deduced from The Incorrect Tag, But it may also only lead to greater confusion by making fallacious assumptions as to when & how The incorrect tag was attached.
This also assumes that The Traveler has failed to include their name & address inside their bag, as every cautious & prudent traveler should.
If Not :
The traveler recognizes that their bag has not met them at their destination and they go to the airline’s counter and report that their bag is missing.
Let us now imagine that the traveler is unable to provide an accurate description of their bags, because they possess an IQ of only 100, and have never given more than a thought or two to ever having to provide an accurate description of their own luggage.
They may also be unable to remember in any detail what is in the bag. Clothes, This & That...
Expensive Jewelry or Electronics they may recall, but these are undoubtedly generic items and could match the contents of dozens of bags.
In the piece; There were dozens of Big Item Electronics, in particular i recall an iPad; As they mentioned the unusuality of this; ‘Who would have so easily abandoned an iPad?’ But certainly; This iPad and many of the other electronic items were Registered ! By some means; It should should be a simple matter to contact the manufacturer and discover the name & address or email of the owner, so as to return the entirety of the items found with it.
If a computer was found in the bag, It would be difficult to imagine that it would not contain numerous references to its owner.
What should the Airline be doing to find the owners of the bags that end up someplace, and are ‘UnClaimed’?
Upon Discovering that there is an UnClaimed Bag somewhere, they should immediately attach a difficult to remove sticker with the time and place that it was discovered, And enter that information into their UnClaimed Computer DataBase. The Computer compares the reports by Irate Travelers to the unclaimed bags, and determines if a given bag (A) could possibly be The Lost Bag (B). If there is still a question of compatibility, The lost bag would be opened in a constricted space ( that is; An enclosed space such that nothing could possibly be mislaid ) and an inventory made of the most ‘memorable’ or ‘unique’ items. And this inventory would be compared with an eye for ‘approximate’ matching to the inventories that the travelers report was in their bags.
The bags that meet this ‘Matching’ Criteria would then be delivered to the Traveler’s door, wherever they happen to be at that time.
- -
It’s just crazy that the airlines are simply accepting that these bags are ‘UnClaimed’.
- -
If you knock off a liquor store and accidentally shoot a clinically obese, chain smoking clerk that disrespected you by making a snide comment about your dear irish mother; You’ll get the electric chair,
But if you steal billions of dollars worth of luggage from deeply stressed and abused travelers, The 4th branch of our government, the last line of defense that is supposed to protect us from the abuses of the rich & powerful; they think it’s fawking hilarious. !!!
- -
Nightline Program Title : Unclaimed Luggage : Bought & Sold
On Nightline tonight they had a piece on ‘Lost Luggage’
and while Nightline and other ‘news’ programs like this often get astonishingly worked up over celebrities or politicians that are caught in the most benign examples of ’Shenanigans’,
When they are faced with Grand Theft Larceny against The World’s Travelers, they treat it like a giant Joke !!!
What they should have explained is How Exactly The Airlines make a reasonable attempt to find the owners of The Luggage that they’ve misplaced...?
Just What is: ‘UnClaimed’ ?
How can people get off a plane and simply forget about their baggage filled with expensive clothes, jewelry or electronics?
Just what does the Airline expect the traveler to do to ‘Claim’ their misplaced Luggage?
This is so amazing evil !
This is simply more evidence that everyone about western civilization is completely wrong.
- -
i will try to be charitable here towards the airlines;
Considering that according to this report, a full 1% ( A Stupendously Gigantic Number, given the millions of people traveling by air every hour ) of the luggage that everyone now has to pay an extra $100 per bag for, is misplaced.
This is assuming that the tag that was ostensibly attached to the bag at the time of check in was somehow, by some means, innocent or malicious, was removed.
If the tag is still in place, the owner should be painfully easy to locate and return at the expense & all difficulties of the airline.
The Third possibility is that the tag on the bag is Not the Tag that was put there at Check In, or During Check In, The Tags were somehow mixed up with Other Tags of Other Passengers. Once this is discovered, the Bag would be considered as a Bag without a Tag.
There may be some ‘Encrypted’ ( ? ) information that may be deduced from The Incorrect Tag, But it may also only lead to greater confusion by making fallacious assumptions as to when & how The incorrect tag was attached.
This also assumes that The Traveler has failed to include their name & address inside their bag, as every cautious & prudent traveler should.
If Not :
The traveler recognizes that their bag has not met them at their destination and they go to the airline’s counter and report that their bag is missing.
Let us now imagine that the traveler is unable to provide an accurate description of their bags, because they possess an IQ of only 100, and have never given more than a thought or two to ever having to provide an accurate description of their own luggage.
They may also be unable to remember in any detail what is in the bag. Clothes, This & That...
Expensive Jewelry or Electronics they may recall, but these are undoubtedly generic items and could match the contents of dozens of bags.
In the piece; There were dozens of Big Item Electronics, in particular i recall an iPad; As they mentioned the unusuality of this; ‘Who would have so easily abandoned an iPad?’ But certainly; This iPad and many of the other electronic items were Registered ! By some means; It should should be a simple matter to contact the manufacturer and discover the name & address or email of the owner, so as to return the entirety of the items found with it.
If a computer was found in the bag, It would be difficult to imagine that it would not contain numerous references to its owner.
What should the Airline be doing to find the owners of the bags that end up someplace, and are ‘UnClaimed’?
Upon Discovering that there is an UnClaimed Bag somewhere, they should immediately attach a difficult to remove sticker with the time and place that it was discovered, And enter that information into their UnClaimed Computer DataBase. The Computer compares the reports by Irate Travelers to the unclaimed bags, and determines if a given bag (A) could possibly be The Lost Bag (B). If there is still a question of compatibility, The lost bag would be opened in a constricted space ( that is; An enclosed space such that nothing could possibly be mislaid ) and an inventory made of the most ‘memorable’ or ‘unique’ items. And this inventory would be compared with an eye for ‘approximate’ matching to the inventories that the travelers report was in their bags.
The bags that meet this ‘Matching’ Criteria would then be delivered to the Traveler’s door, wherever they happen to be at that time.
- -
It’s just crazy that the airlines are simply accepting that these bags are ‘UnClaimed’.
- -
If you knock off a liquor store and accidentally shoot a clinically obese, chain smoking clerk that disrespected you by making a snide comment about your dear irish mother; You’ll get the electric chair,
But if you steal billions of dollars worth of luggage from deeply stressed and abused travelers, The 4th branch of our government, the last line of defense that is supposed to protect us from the abuses of the rich & powerful; they think it’s fawking hilarious. !!!
- -
More Confusion Regarding The Illusion of FreeWill
Regarding : A concise statement of the problem of free will
From Wm Jas’ Bugs to fearen babes withall
John C. Wright recently posted on Determinism and Indeterminism and quoted this concise statement of the problem of free will, which was written by a reader of his called Lucky Marty:
Consider the following propositions:
1) All events are either the deterministic result of prior events or else they are random. ( Are there ANY Random Events? / Is Determinism Defined ?
2) Free choices are not fully determined by prior events. ( Definition
3) Free choices are not random. ( Definition
4) People make free choices. ( Wistful Dreaming
All of them seem highly plausible,
and in fact it’s not easy to see how any of them could be false.
But they can’t all be true
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <
It seems to be that statements of Fact may be considered either true or false;
But these are Not statements of fact; At Least Some of them are Definitions.
As such; Are Some or All of them Exclusive ( XOR ) Definitions?
In my final conclusion of Assertion;
Or Assertion that remains an unsubstantiated Conclusion:
The First Claim is Suspect.
Everything that we experience in the macroworld closely adheres to the model of cause & effect; Yet Quantum Physicists ( seem to ) be suggesting that there are events within or in the vicinity of atomic nuclei that are random.
We have no direct experience with anything that is genuinely random,
So it’s not entirely proved that there even are random, uncaused events.
My Unsubstantiated Assertion is that there is another class of phenomena that occurs routinely, but is something other than cause & effect.
To make this Claim slightly more palatable,
If i were to successfully make distinctions between well understood examples of cause & effect, then these separate cases of what we are tentatively calling Causality; Then it may be reasonable to lay them out along a continuum that features realms that we do not have ready examples for, but which we may provisionally assert that -Maybe- There are Undefined Instances which fit into that niche of QuaziCausality.
( ? )
1) There is the simplistic idealized case of one domino falling against the next.
In this example; The ONLY thing effecting Domino B is The Action upon it from Domino A.
2) There is a Perception of Another Case in which things are Caused by Localized Events. A Workings of An Automobile Engine, or The Behaviour of this Automobile is entirely the result of it’s construction & the instructions given to it by it’s driver. / Another Example is That The Mind is The Result of The ElectroChemical Activity of The Brain, which in Influenced by Its Senses & Related Local Events.
But [ 3 ] will show that this is an illusion.
3) In The Real World; Every Domino is Effected by The Gravitational & Electromagnetic Fields of Every Other Particle in The Universe that supports these forces. This asserts that when a Domino in The Real World Tips over, It is The State of The Entire Universe that is Effecting it.
This may not be convincing when applied to Dominoes, But it may be more reasonably believed when applied to Whether or Not a Single Neuron in A Brain, Teetering on Firing or Not Firing, May be Influenced by such subtle effects as The Gravitational Waves radiating from a distant quasar or The ElectroMagnetic Fields of all The Toasters in North America. This Single Neuron may determine the outcome of some grandiose, historical effect.
In such a case; Each Decision is the result of how the entire universe is ‘set’ at that moment.
This hardly seems like classical ‘Cause & Effect’,
It is more like ‘What is; Is.’ or ‘Everything is.’
It should be added that i am not suggesting that simply because a system is insanely complicated, or even Chaotic, that it Categorically Transcends The Simpler Models of If A then B, or A causes B.
In all cases, There are numerous causes for B.
But - When Chaos transcends Chaos and slaps upside the butt cheeks of Randomality, Then maybe there is a sliver of A Categorical Shift.
This is a NetherRegion of; Not Quite Random.
It’s one subunit short of Infinite Chaos.
.999... doesn’t equal 1.
.999... doesn’t in any way explain, justify or allow for Freewill,
But it does suggest that there is another Category that is not Cause & Effect,
And it’s not Genuine Randomality. It’s Something else.
And if .999... is a unique value,
Then there are undoubtedly other kinds of ‘Order’ that are not readily familiar to us.
4) If There are Tachyons or other particles that freely travel back & forth through time, or perhaps; Electrons or Photons or Other bundled Leptons or Quarks may occasionally skim off the edge of A Black Hole’s Event Horizon, Falling backwards or forwards in time; The it may well by that every decision that any given neuron contributes to, May be Influenced by All Past & Future Events.
This is even less like classical ‘Cause & Effect’.
5) Since there are particles that apparently ( According to The Standard Model & Other Theories that Include Gravity ) Are Not effected by some Forces; The Remaining Particles Are Effected by Proximal Forces Only. This is slightly different from The Single Domino A falling on B. It is more like A Mysterious Cloud of Indeterminacy Telling an Electron to Fall from One Atomic Orbit to Another, Either Absorbing or Releasing An Photon.
There may be other Classes;
But i think that this should demonstrate that this idea of Classical Cause & Effect doesn’t really exist at all.
Everything effects Everything.
The Universe, Like The Brain, filled with dozen & dozens ( et. al. ) of neurons that may or may not be responsible for The Mind, consists of A Pattern at any given moment, that Determines what the next Pattern in the sequence of Time & Space or Consciousness will be.
Or
Maybe there are other causal forces that we are not familiar with,
Even within our ability to imagine,
Or our meta-ability to imagine.
This Meta-Ability to Imagine ( x )
Simply means that there are ( Undoubtedly ? ) Phenomena within the universe,
Or The Universe that our Universe Resides within,
That is beyound The Human Mind to Consider even as nonsensical gibberish.
This is where freewill may be able to stick it’s fingers into.
The final conclusion here is that ( ? ) The Universe is The Sole Generator of The Mind, Which is Distributed to Innumerable ‘Nodes’ which are encased in Brains.
The Autonomous Universe is The Mind Generator.
And Brains are somehow uniquely structured to allow Minds to Coalesce These Patterns into Awareness.
The Paranoid Solipsist Universe
Consists of One Mind that Believes it is many Minds.
- - -
i have also asserted ( elsewhere ) that freewill is necessary for Consciousness.
i realize that this conclusion is detached from an argument.
So perhaps one should be forwarded.
i should first suggest or reveal; that i am of two minds when it comes to these metaphysical topics.
i often wonder; If the brain is solely responsible for creating the mind,
How might it do this?
And i believe that i am comfortable with the assertion that the brain may indeed be responsible for all human behaviour,
But i am deeply flummoxed ( or vexed ) by the idea the brain creating the mind.
i am even comfortable with a robot ( without conscious reflection or awareness ) duplicating ALL Human behaviour, from the lowest to the highest, the most altruistic to the most senselessly violent & sadistic behaviours.
This robot would be able to make art, compose symphonies, and provide itself with self directed motivations, based on very simple core instructions ( our instincts ).
But how can a pattern of ElectroChemical Neurons spread out over a brain, Create The Holistic Experience of ’Seeing’, which is quite different from what the robot does. The robot can identify things in it’s visual field and act on them, but does a robot ‘See’ things? Is The robot conscious of a visual field in front of it, where these identified things all fit together into a 1::1 correspondence with what is actually out there?
In the brain; In the visual Cortex; The impulses from the eyes have to be ( ? ) broken apart into their smallest constituents to determine their color, form, edge properties and whatever else is used a cues to finally identify the innumerable blobs of light as stems of grass, faces, formless clouds, encyclopedias of symbols, or any number of other objects which may appear in countless orientations and be very reliably identified, and then; Be somehow reassembled into this movie screen which the mind ‘Sees’.
How is this done? The Robot may be able to accomplish everything quite easily,
Up until that last step.
A computer may easily identify a blobby green thing as a leaf,
But the mind doesn’t ‘See’ A Blobby Green Thing; It sees every detail of every leaf.
This seems like quite a different thing to me.
It is as nearly incomprehensible to consider how an ordinary computer can display characters on a screen, as for a human mind to see them.
It may be argued that the former may be astonishingly tedious for the computer,
But genuinely impossible for The Mind to Understand the latter.
But when sufficient tedium meets complete impossibility,
The effects are equally weighed.
But how does this relate to Freewill?
By Freewill, Maybe what i mean is Autonomy.
Does one need Autonomy for Freewill?
i would think so.
Is Autonomy necessary for Consciousness?
The Conscious Mind without Autonomy, would be either;
A Subset of A Greater Autonomous Mind or Mind Generator
or
A Mere Observer in A Mechanical World.
The Theory of Epiphenomenalism takes this latter Conclusion.
It is Very Convincing.
Epiphenomenalism argues that Consciousness is real,
Awareness is Real, The Autonomous Mind is Real,
But it is trapped in a bubble from which all it’s thoughts are generated by the brain, which is subservient to the machines of reality.
It Watches Only.
The Mind has No influence on The World or even it’s own robot vehicle or it’s own thoughts.
If The Conscious Mind were without Autonomy And as such; A Subset of a Greater Mind that Controls it; Then this Argues for Either a Genuine Autonomous Mind, and or A Recursive, Infinite or Torus Shaped Continuum of Conscious Entities.
i’m not entirely opposed to a boot-strap theory of these things, but i don’t necessarily see how that’s really going to advance a greater understanding or explain away elemental difficulties.
The Major Problem with Epiphenomenalism is not that the argument itself is critically flawed, it’s just that it provides no clue whatsoever how this agent of awareness is generated.
It simply takes The Conscious Mind and strips it of any involvement in The Mechanical Universe.
What is Required to make a Conscious Mind?
This is remain unanswered until one is given to a robot,
And even so; As i have suggested already, This robot may exhibit all genuine human / Conscious behaviour, without being conscious at all.
How would you test for Consciousness?
Assuming that it -Could Be- Successfully faked.
Could a Robot Successfully Fake Freewill?
If this Very Human Like Robot were made ( Very Large ) so that every decision or action it partakes in could be mapped out as the result of every fully documented Gear rotation or Transistor Switching Action, Then The Assertion; Made By The Robot, that it was Free & Self Aware, would be suspect or utterly disproven- -
But if This Robot was composed of elements that could take advantage of gravity waves propagating from distant quasars or The weak force shedding apparently random neutrons, Then No Such Map of Every Decision could be made, and The Robot would be, should be, considered humanly autonomous until demonstrated as otherwise controlled.
But is it Really Free?
Does it all come down to The Appearance of Freewill for all possible Cases?
Is there, Conceivably, an AntiThesis to this Assertion?
From Wm Jas’ Bugs to fearen babes withall
John C. Wright recently posted on Determinism and Indeterminism and quoted this concise statement of the problem of free will, which was written by a reader of his called Lucky Marty:
Consider the following propositions:
1) All events are either the deterministic result of prior events or else they are random. ( Are there ANY Random Events? / Is Determinism Defined ?
2) Free choices are not fully determined by prior events. ( Definition
3) Free choices are not random. ( Definition
4) People make free choices. ( Wistful Dreaming
All of them seem highly plausible,
and in fact it’s not easy to see how any of them could be false.
But they can’t all be true
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <
It seems to be that statements of Fact may be considered either true or false;
But these are Not statements of fact; At Least Some of them are Definitions.
As such; Are Some or All of them Exclusive ( XOR ) Definitions?
In my final conclusion of Assertion;
Or Assertion that remains an unsubstantiated Conclusion:
The First Claim is Suspect.
Everything that we experience in the macroworld closely adheres to the model of cause & effect; Yet Quantum Physicists ( seem to ) be suggesting that there are events within or in the vicinity of atomic nuclei that are random.
We have no direct experience with anything that is genuinely random,
So it’s not entirely proved that there even are random, uncaused events.
My Unsubstantiated Assertion is that there is another class of phenomena that occurs routinely, but is something other than cause & effect.
To make this Claim slightly more palatable,
If i were to successfully make distinctions between well understood examples of cause & effect, then these separate cases of what we are tentatively calling Causality; Then it may be reasonable to lay them out along a continuum that features realms that we do not have ready examples for, but which we may provisionally assert that -Maybe- There are Undefined Instances which fit into that niche of QuaziCausality.
( ? )
1) There is the simplistic idealized case of one domino falling against the next.
In this example; The ONLY thing effecting Domino B is The Action upon it from Domino A.
2) There is a Perception of Another Case in which things are Caused by Localized Events. A Workings of An Automobile Engine, or The Behaviour of this Automobile is entirely the result of it’s construction & the instructions given to it by it’s driver. / Another Example is That The Mind is The Result of The ElectroChemical Activity of The Brain, which in Influenced by Its Senses & Related Local Events.
But [ 3 ] will show that this is an illusion.
3) In The Real World; Every Domino is Effected by The Gravitational & Electromagnetic Fields of Every Other Particle in The Universe that supports these forces. This asserts that when a Domino in The Real World Tips over, It is The State of The Entire Universe that is Effecting it.
This may not be convincing when applied to Dominoes, But it may be more reasonably believed when applied to Whether or Not a Single Neuron in A Brain, Teetering on Firing or Not Firing, May be Influenced by such subtle effects as The Gravitational Waves radiating from a distant quasar or The ElectroMagnetic Fields of all The Toasters in North America. This Single Neuron may determine the outcome of some grandiose, historical effect.
In such a case; Each Decision is the result of how the entire universe is ‘set’ at that moment.
This hardly seems like classical ‘Cause & Effect’,
It is more like ‘What is; Is.’ or ‘Everything is.’
It should be added that i am not suggesting that simply because a system is insanely complicated, or even Chaotic, that it Categorically Transcends The Simpler Models of If A then B, or A causes B.
In all cases, There are numerous causes for B.
But - When Chaos transcends Chaos and slaps upside the butt cheeks of Randomality, Then maybe there is a sliver of A Categorical Shift.
This is a NetherRegion of; Not Quite Random.
It’s one subunit short of Infinite Chaos.
.999... doesn’t equal 1.
.999... doesn’t in any way explain, justify or allow for Freewill,
But it does suggest that there is another Category that is not Cause & Effect,
And it’s not Genuine Randomality. It’s Something else.
And if .999... is a unique value,
Then there are undoubtedly other kinds of ‘Order’ that are not readily familiar to us.
4) If There are Tachyons or other particles that freely travel back & forth through time, or perhaps; Electrons or Photons or Other bundled Leptons or Quarks may occasionally skim off the edge of A Black Hole’s Event Horizon, Falling backwards or forwards in time; The it may well by that every decision that any given neuron contributes to, May be Influenced by All Past & Future Events.
This is even less like classical ‘Cause & Effect’.
5) Since there are particles that apparently ( According to The Standard Model & Other Theories that Include Gravity ) Are Not effected by some Forces; The Remaining Particles Are Effected by Proximal Forces Only. This is slightly different from The Single Domino A falling on B. It is more like A Mysterious Cloud of Indeterminacy Telling an Electron to Fall from One Atomic Orbit to Another, Either Absorbing or Releasing An Photon.
There may be other Classes;
But i think that this should demonstrate that this idea of Classical Cause & Effect doesn’t really exist at all.
Everything effects Everything.
The Universe, Like The Brain, filled with dozen & dozens ( et. al. ) of neurons that may or may not be responsible for The Mind, consists of A Pattern at any given moment, that Determines what the next Pattern in the sequence of Time & Space or Consciousness will be.
Or
Maybe there are other causal forces that we are not familiar with,
Even within our ability to imagine,
Or our meta-ability to imagine.
This Meta-Ability to Imagine ( x )
Simply means that there are ( Undoubtedly ? ) Phenomena within the universe,
Or The Universe that our Universe Resides within,
That is beyound The Human Mind to Consider even as nonsensical gibberish.
This is where freewill may be able to stick it’s fingers into.
The final conclusion here is that ( ? ) The Universe is The Sole Generator of The Mind, Which is Distributed to Innumerable ‘Nodes’ which are encased in Brains.
The Autonomous Universe is The Mind Generator.
And Brains are somehow uniquely structured to allow Minds to Coalesce These Patterns into Awareness.
The Paranoid Solipsist Universe
Consists of One Mind that Believes it is many Minds.
- - -
i have also asserted ( elsewhere ) that freewill is necessary for Consciousness.
i realize that this conclusion is detached from an argument.
So perhaps one should be forwarded.
i should first suggest or reveal; that i am of two minds when it comes to these metaphysical topics.
i often wonder; If the brain is solely responsible for creating the mind,
How might it do this?
And i believe that i am comfortable with the assertion that the brain may indeed be responsible for all human behaviour,
But i am deeply flummoxed ( or vexed ) by the idea the brain creating the mind.
i am even comfortable with a robot ( without conscious reflection or awareness ) duplicating ALL Human behaviour, from the lowest to the highest, the most altruistic to the most senselessly violent & sadistic behaviours.
This robot would be able to make art, compose symphonies, and provide itself with self directed motivations, based on very simple core instructions ( our instincts ).
But how can a pattern of ElectroChemical Neurons spread out over a brain, Create The Holistic Experience of ’Seeing’, which is quite different from what the robot does. The robot can identify things in it’s visual field and act on them, but does a robot ‘See’ things? Is The robot conscious of a visual field in front of it, where these identified things all fit together into a 1::1 correspondence with what is actually out there?
In the brain; In the visual Cortex; The impulses from the eyes have to be ( ? ) broken apart into their smallest constituents to determine their color, form, edge properties and whatever else is used a cues to finally identify the innumerable blobs of light as stems of grass, faces, formless clouds, encyclopedias of symbols, or any number of other objects which may appear in countless orientations and be very reliably identified, and then; Be somehow reassembled into this movie screen which the mind ‘Sees’.
How is this done? The Robot may be able to accomplish everything quite easily,
Up until that last step.
A computer may easily identify a blobby green thing as a leaf,
But the mind doesn’t ‘See’ A Blobby Green Thing; It sees every detail of every leaf.
This seems like quite a different thing to me.
It is as nearly incomprehensible to consider how an ordinary computer can display characters on a screen, as for a human mind to see them.
It may be argued that the former may be astonishingly tedious for the computer,
But genuinely impossible for The Mind to Understand the latter.
But when sufficient tedium meets complete impossibility,
The effects are equally weighed.
But how does this relate to Freewill?
By Freewill, Maybe what i mean is Autonomy.
Does one need Autonomy for Freewill?
i would think so.
Is Autonomy necessary for Consciousness?
The Conscious Mind without Autonomy, would be either;
A Subset of A Greater Autonomous Mind or Mind Generator
or
A Mere Observer in A Mechanical World.
The Theory of Epiphenomenalism takes this latter Conclusion.
It is Very Convincing.
Epiphenomenalism argues that Consciousness is real,
Awareness is Real, The Autonomous Mind is Real,
But it is trapped in a bubble from which all it’s thoughts are generated by the brain, which is subservient to the machines of reality.
It Watches Only.
The Mind has No influence on The World or even it’s own robot vehicle or it’s own thoughts.
If The Conscious Mind were without Autonomy And as such; A Subset of a Greater Mind that Controls it; Then this Argues for Either a Genuine Autonomous Mind, and or A Recursive, Infinite or Torus Shaped Continuum of Conscious Entities.
i’m not entirely opposed to a boot-strap theory of these things, but i don’t necessarily see how that’s really going to advance a greater understanding or explain away elemental difficulties.
The Major Problem with Epiphenomenalism is not that the argument itself is critically flawed, it’s just that it provides no clue whatsoever how this agent of awareness is generated.
It simply takes The Conscious Mind and strips it of any involvement in The Mechanical Universe.
What is Required to make a Conscious Mind?
This is remain unanswered until one is given to a robot,
And even so; As i have suggested already, This robot may exhibit all genuine human / Conscious behaviour, without being conscious at all.
How would you test for Consciousness?
Assuming that it -Could Be- Successfully faked.
Could a Robot Successfully Fake Freewill?
If this Very Human Like Robot were made ( Very Large ) so that every decision or action it partakes in could be mapped out as the result of every fully documented Gear rotation or Transistor Switching Action, Then The Assertion; Made By The Robot, that it was Free & Self Aware, would be suspect or utterly disproven- -
But if This Robot was composed of elements that could take advantage of gravity waves propagating from distant quasars or The weak force shedding apparently random neutrons, Then No Such Map of Every Decision could be made, and The Robot would be, should be, considered humanly autonomous until demonstrated as otherwise controlled.
But is it Really Free?
Does it all come down to The Appearance of Freewill for all possible Cases?
Is there, Conceivably, an AntiThesis to this Assertion?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)