danbruc

49 ms·

781.
by danbruc 3y ago
This seems debatable, but let us assume they are not obviously inconsistent. Those postulates only really mean something if you apply them in some situation, and if you apply them as laid out a few comments before, they make inconsistent cl
782.
by danbruc 3y ago
It is objectively inconsistent, the postulates contradict each other. But for almost a century we did not make any substantial progress, neither resolving the issue theoretically or philosophically, nor experimentally demonstrating any prob
783.
by danbruc 3y ago
The postulates are roughly quantum system evolve unitarily except when they are measured, then a non-unitary wave function collapse happens. That is inconsistent. For the system under investigation this works, it evolves unitarily until mea
784.
by danbruc 3y ago
Again, just take a look at the postulates: Schrödinger equation describes the unitary time evolution of the system under a given Hamiltonian, wavefunction collapse describes the outcome of the non-unitary measurement process. The outcome
785.
by danbruc 3y ago
They don't need to be because they describe totally different phenomena. In which way are they describing different phenomena? They both describe the evolution of the wave function, the Schrödinger equation while everyone is leaving
786.
by danbruc 3y ago
Sure, but many people do think it does, and such an interpretation is totally compatible with QM. The Schrödinger equation and wave function collapse are not compatible. Maybe they could be integrated in some theory, but that will need a
787.
by danbruc 3y ago
Yes, and then what happens when you decide to measure the state of the part of the system that lies in one region of space? If I had any good idea, I would go pick up my Nobel Prize. The only thing I can really say is that I do not think
788.
by danbruc 3y ago
A wormhole is not really non-local, I would argue, you just get another path between two points that might be much shorter than the regular shortest path avoiding the wormhole. But even travelling through a wormhole would not make you disap
789.
by danbruc 3y ago
Entanglement is not a non-local interaction, it means that state of the system can not be separated into independent states of its constituents. That altering the state of one particle could non-locally influence the state of another partic
790.
by danbruc 3y ago
After picking some scheme to generate messages that predict n bits of their hash in some form, the chance of finding at least one message that correctly predicts its hash is 1 - (1 - 1/x)^x where x is 2^n. This approaches 1 - 1/e
791.
by danbruc 3y ago
Nobody is claiming that removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is producing energy, it will always cost some energy. When we reached zero carbon dioxide emissions, then one can consider actively lowering the carbon dioxide level by pul
792.
by danbruc 3y ago
[...] it’s unlikely (due to the thermodynamics of it) that removing a ton of CO2 will ever get to the point where it requires less energy than the energy produced from burning the fuel that created that ton of CO2. This argument only work
793.
by danbruc 3y ago
What is the logic behind this carbon capture process? They repeatedly go through the lime cycle - calcium carbonate, calcium oxyd, calcium hydroxyd and back to calcium carbonate. We are producing millions of tons of calcium oxide per year a
794.
by danbruc 3y ago
Drawing a circle by drawing circles - tiny ones, they will just look like single pixels - might be confusing to some, including me. I would suggest connecting adjacent points with lines, that is conceptually not really harder than just draw
795.
by danbruc 3y ago
To kill or imprison someone who had no choice about their actions would be unjust. To simplify things, assume a serial killer that would kill again, or a thief that would continue stealing. Why is imprisoning this person worse than more p
796.
by danbruc 3y ago
We are stuck fighting over the definitions of words. And I kind of lost sight of the initial issue. Even if everything is deterministic, human society can only function successfully with the illusion of free will. If we admit nobody can be
797.
by danbruc 3y ago
Minds are implemented within physics, but human concepts w.r.t. minds (e.g. responsibility, choice, freedom..) are only valid on the level of the minds, without any reference to the underlying physics. I agree that the concepts we use to
798.
by danbruc 3y ago
To say someone did something wrong is to say they should have done something else. They important word is could not should. Yes, you are literally saying this robot is to blame for the problem. I am saying the robot caused the issue - f
799.
by danbruc 3y ago
At least in some countries we have not been locking people up for punishment for quite some time. You go to prison to protect the public, change your behavior, and deter others from committing crimes, not for punishment. The public percepti
800.
by danbruc 3y ago
I think we actually agree on this, we just have to separate two pieces. When it comes to determining which kind of behavior we want, what we want to encourage and discourage, then determinism or not is probably not relevant. I would not com
801.
by danbruc 3y ago
This still implicitly asserts that the murderers are to blame for something. Well, this will quickly turn into the nuances of definitions of words. Blame can have several subtilely different meanings, so call it blame if you want. I will
802.
by danbruc 3y ago
Policies which reduce crime / recidivism rates are good; policies that don't are bad. Killing all people will reduce the crime and recidivism rates to zero. At the very least you want some more nuance. The efficacy of policies
803.
by danbruc 3y ago
If we admit nobody can be blamed for their actions, we can't punish them and thus the incentives not to do bad things disappear and the whole shebang collapses. That's not true. You can put people behind bars, say for example mu
804.
by danbruc 3y ago
[...] determinism doesn’t help me with ethics or morality. It does. When we look at criminals we nowadays take into account medical and psychological conditions, we are aware that people are not always in full control of what they are doi
805.
by danbruc 3y ago
There are many angles to this. The first one would of course be what you said, there would be no choice otherwise. I think in general a deterministic universe would not be too different from one with true free will, at least from the perspe
806.
by danbruc 3y ago
Because he makes an easy mistake in the quote? I would say the real confusion will start showing up once you try making sense of the words »noticed« and »claim« in that sentence.
807.
by danbruc 3y ago
We of course mean the same thing. Reevaluation has, at least to me and in the context it was used in here, this quality of deciding to have another look. Well, in some sense you will even in a deterministic universe decide to have another l
808.
by danbruc 3y ago
Are those ideas not essentially orthogonal and therefore never were in conflict? Determinism is about what can or will happen given the current state of the universe, panpsychism is trying to explain where your experience of the current sta
809.
by danbruc 3y ago
That's not actually true, or at least it is not currently known. It is very well possible that distances less than a Planck length have meaning, or maybe distances lose all meaning a couple of orders of magnitude above the Planck lengt
810.
by danbruc 3y ago
Which seems to be really useful if you want your point particles not becoming black holes upon creation. If you think about it, every classical electron should be a black hole, it is already thanks to quantum physics that this is not the ca

More ›