Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - stuck

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 124
Everything Else / Re: Quantum Mechanics and 11 demensions
« on: January 27, 2008, 03:25:26 pm »
The illusion of free will is almost as important as free will itself. Since we can't exactly predict reactions to stimuli because of quantum mechanics, it may just as well be cosidered free will. To truly have free will, you'd need a mind not of this universe. By definition, a mind not of this universe can't really interact with it, so we can discount that possibility. What we do have instead is randomness and unpredictability. If we do not know what action a being will take, isn't that the same situation as free will? Like Quantum Burrito said, define free will.

Everything Else / Re: Quantum Mechanics and 11 demensions
« on: January 27, 2008, 09:31:18 am »
I don't believe we have "free will" as you put it; it's an illusion. If we do something, it's because our brain has computed in such a way that it is done. The decision may be conscious or otherwise, but it, under the same circumstances, would always be the same.

This isn't necessarily true. Suppose we have a hypothetical particle a in a superposition of states and measure its state. After its wavefunction collapses, we let it spread out again so that it is essentially the same as before (Schrodinger equation is time-independent). If we measure its state again, the recorded value might be different than before. So, returning to our brain, we can't predict with certainty whether or not we will react one way or another. Depending on how much quantum mechanical phenomena matter in the mind, we see that the our thought processes may indeed differ from one identical situation to another.

Now let's look at this from the many worlds interpretation. In one timeline, the particle takes path a and the other path b. If this action is needed in computing our decision, then one of us lives in world A and the other in world B. Clearly what we actually end up doing is different in the different scenarios.

Everything Else / Re: Evolution yes/no
« on: January 27, 2008, 09:22:08 am »
I am a theist partially because of the prisoner's dillema, and partially because I just believe the Bible.

Athiests are right:Athiests and Christians just disappear after death, a fate I consider to be worse than anything.
Christians are right:Chrstians get to live in Heaven, Athiests go to hell.

That's not the Prisoner's Dillema. That's Pascal's wager. And it's intellectually dishonest to believe in God simply because you fear His hypothetical wrath. In which case you'd be sent to hell anyways.

Everything Else / Re: Quantum Mechanics and 11 demensions
« on: January 26, 2008, 12:00:21 pm »
How can nothing in our universe be predictable?
Philosophy: Because that would destroy the concept of free will.

QM: Particles are ascribed wavefunctions. The absolute value of the wavefunction squared gives the probability that a particle will be at that certain point. Experimentally, this works out to give values that correspond to charge. Schrodinger originally thought that the wavefunction represented charge density, but the probability interpretation gives more accurate explanations.

but if we built some type of amazingly advanced 11 dimensional computer wouldn't it be able to predict the motion of subatomic particles?
No, not by our current understanding of quantum mechanics.

and those things have definite actions
Definite random actions. The realm of quantum mechanics likely plays a large role in the way our brain processes information.

If a ball is rolling off of a cliff and about to fall, it will fall. There is no probability.
That's because its wavefunction is so compact and continuously collapses so that we may say the probability of it being in point a is 1.

The site explains it, but it says that because of our free will and probability we create different time lines.
This seems like an unhealthy mixture of the Everretan (Many Worlds) and Copenhagen interpretations. The math between the two is hard to reconcile. Either each different choice a wavefunction has creates a new timeline and therefore a new universe (Many Worlds), or an observer's measurement realizes which state the wavefunction took (Copenhagen).

Everything Else / Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« on: January 24, 2008, 04:01:15 pm »
Yeah, I heard that.

By the way, what where his motives for demanding (and paying for) a recount in New Hampshire?

Everything Else / Re: The Manly Discussion of Manliness.
« on: January 24, 2008, 03:44:52 pm »
Well, I've won a few pickup boxing matches with people that weighed more than me. I didn't necessarily win by my manliness, more by my (gigantic briain) tactics.

Console Games / Re: Super Smash Bros Brawl Megathread [SPOILER PARADISE]
« on: January 23, 2008, 07:14:24 pm »
My friend modded his Wii. So he'll be playing the Japanese version of SSBB in... what, a week?

I'll be playing with him. 8)

Don't worry guys, I'll tell you everything.

Music / Re: Heineken Song
« on: January 23, 2008, 06:40:03 pm »
For some reason it slightly reminded me of Daft Punk's "Technologic". Similar theme, repetition of related words, accentuated words that highlight the theme, and bass.

Everything Else / Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« on: January 20, 2008, 01:12:15 pm »
I'd say Huckabee is pretty much insignificant. It's more like McCain > Romney, Obama ~ Hillary

Ad hominem means that you are not attacking the opposition's point, but rather the opposition. By claiming that the opposition is thinking like a caveman, you attack the opposition by ridiculing him as of substandard intellect. Saying that the thought is medieval as opposed to the person is medieval are two entirely different things. I'm sure you meant that the thought was primitive, not the person, but next time choose your words carefully. It will save a lot of grief in the long run.

Stop thinking like a caveman.

(Ad hominem)10

We can agree that the prison system needs reform. Not only is it costly, but it is ineffective. The true question is which way we should take it. I see a few possibilities for newer 'treatment'.

An Orwellian-type system would work rather well in smaller governments. Commit a crime and that person is under close scrutiny for a period of time. Kind of like modern probation, but more technologically advanced. Now, while this is genuinely a threat to civil liberties on the whole and can be abused by a corrupt government, I believe it can work well for small-scale agencies (think Vatican sized). While this does certainly mean a restriction of liberties, how is that any different from prison? Current prisoners do not possess much liberties anyways. This method would certainly be much cheaper than full scale prisons. Its tendency to be abused is also about equal. Public outcry against it might be particularly marked, if only for the risks involved for the non-convicts in the country. However, once we achieve that point in automation and surveillance, it can be much more effective than prisons. 'Convicts' would go about their regular lives as they should, but only doing activities deemed good. This may mean getting a legal job or going to college or doing community work or helping others. The idea is, in the real world they have a good chance of realizing that living without ill intentions may be a rewarding experience, so they would be discouraged to slip back. Also, the though of sacrificing your private life for a crime is something few criminals would take, for even in prison there is private time.

People sometimes bring up the idea of training criminals. On the surface, this seems like a good idea. But, then the criminals are being given special treatment over plenty of honest people that are working in order to obtain that education. While training may guarantee employment, it may also mean an increase in crimes due to people wanting to get their way in. I've even read an article that claimed criminals are given medical precedence, and offenders offend again in order to get free health care. If I recall correctly, they even sued the prisons for not giving them doctors!

If worst comes to worst, I suppose you could just send offenders into exile. :D

Everything Else / Re: You have two cows.
« on: January 19, 2008, 07:09:24 pm »
Caution: Kicking Cows may cause serious injury.

Everything Else / Re: You have two cows.
« on: January 19, 2008, 02:59:23 pm »
You live with two cows.

Two cows have you.

PC Games / Re: Guitar hero 3 for the PC (Yes you read it right)
« on: January 19, 2008, 02:44:28 pm »
For that matter most people have consoles over computers

Wait, did I read that right?

Anyways, can you play the guitar on your keyboard too? And how does the song importing feature work?

Everything Else / Re: 2008 US Presidential Election-Official Discussion
« on: January 18, 2008, 05:55:09 pm »
Just wondering, am I allowed to state my opposing opinion or will you get upset?

Ah, what the hell. I'll do it anyway.

Huckabee sticks to his views unswayed and thats something i have high respect for.
I'll admit that sometimes it is seen as admirable for a person to not change their convictions in a storm of contradictory evidence. But it shouldn't be. Sure, you're right about Huckabee being 'unswayed,' so to speak. After all, he isn't shaken by evidence against creationism. But is that a good thing? It seems like people think its conventional wisdom that rigidity is good. Again, it shouldn't be. Flexibility in a candidate reveals to me that they are constantly challenging their own notions in light of new evidence. It means that they are ready for a change in circumstances. Besides, you can't compromise if you can't bend back sometimes. As I said before, that's why I support Obama. Not only are we nearly 100% in agreement on the issues (turns out he really doesn't like the Patriot Act, he reluctantly voted in a slight improvement, saying more needed to be done), but I see compromise as the best way to run politics. It shouldn't be about bashing your opponent's head in with a cane (a la that one senator in the antebellum era), but about finding the perfect middle ground.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 124