3 ms·
One thing I have been arguing for a long time is that the fundamental constants are different until we observe them. i.e. if we don't observe it, it's possible
by renewiltord 2y ago
One thing I have been arguing for a long time is that the fundamental constants are different until we observe them. i.e. if we don't observe it, it's possible for a tennis ball to travel through a wall. But in the universal program, if we will now or later observe the result, then it won't happen. But it'll happen so long as we will never observe the result. In fact, it's probably happened many times.
No one has proven that this is impossible, AFAIK.
- ezrast 2y agoWhat does "impossible" mean to you if not that a thing and it's consequences can never be observed?
- renewiltord 2y agoImpossible means it does not happen, not that it does not happen only when we look. Just because we can't see it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. After all, as the comment I replied to pointed out, other galaxies can have different constants. We have to be humble and admit we just don't know.
- jiggawatts 2y agoThe problem with these type of arguments is rigorously defining “we” and “look”. Turns out that our gaze has no effect on anything and we’re uninteresting squishy bags of mostly water as far as physical processes are concerned.
- renewiltord 2y agoYeah, but no one has proven that this is impossible so it's still possible. Just like OP comment.
- wizzwizz4 2y agohttps://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-03-25 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-03-25
- ezrast 2y agoThis seems like a distinction without a difference, since we can never positively categorize any unobserved phenomenon as impossible (vs merely unobservable). To me, it seems ontologically cleaner to treat existence and observability as the same thing. shrug
- renewiltord 2y agoOkay, fine, I'll come clean, I was just making an unfalsifiability joke. The original god-of-the-gapsy comment was the one that got me. Always just out of reach of our verifiability is the magic. Why not all the way out?
- ezrast 2y agoWhelp, looks like I'm today's Poe's Law poster child. ;)
- Gooblebrai 2y agoHow can you even prove a negative?
- Intermernet 2y agoLogical mangling time: If you can't prove a negative, how can you prove that you can't?
- dmateos 2y agoBy "Observe" dont they mean the act of any photon "hitting/interacting with" the system collapsing it into a known/predictable state. Not specifically a "intelligent" observer per se.