FYI, the english site is working again: http://intelligenceexplosion.com/en/ I highly recommend reading this, or spreading it around if you're already fluent. This is incredible work. Thanks Luke!
I have a philosophical theory which implies some things empirically about quantum physics, and I was wondering if anyone knowledgeable on the subject could give me some insight. It goes something like this: As an anathema to reductionists, quarks (and by "quarks" I just mean, whatever are the fundamental particles...
It's a story about a boy who is into science and transhumanism, and a girl he told about all these crazy things that were going to happen. He dies and all of the things he said started to happen. She ended up floating around Saturn remembering him. Either he or...
I recently stumbled upon the concept of "reflexive self-processing", which is Chris Langan's "Reality Theory". I am not a physicist, so if I'm wrong or someone can better explain this, or if someone wants to break out the math here, that would be great. The idea of reflexive self-processing is...
FYI, the english site is working again: http://intelligenceexplosion.com/en/ I highly recommend reading this, or spreading it around if you're already fluent. This is incredible work. Thanks Luke!
Well my motive is a belief in the impossibility of the contrary.
If some things can be made out of other things, it seems pretty reasonable that the behavior of the one things would also be somehow made out of the behavior of the others.
Sure, but let me give an example based on an analogy: when you have a group of soldiers formed into a fighting platoon, they behave very differently than when you have a group of soldiers formed into a search and rescue party. Both groups have very different behavior despite being constituted by the same units.
For this reason it would be unsurprising if you could take the same constituent particles... (read more)
I'm not really convinced that it's unlikely. Just because we can construct systems that are strongly deterministic at the macro level doesn't mean that the quantum behavior we can't yet explain isn't based in some way on the higher-level organization of the fundamental particles involved.
I understand your point, but I'd be interested to see this proven (or dis-proven) bottom-up from first principles... observing that something in particular (chlorophyll, photosynthesis, etc) reduces from the top down like this leaves too many holes for it to really disprove the idea (e.g. maybe this isn't a physical function that changes depending on higher-level organization).
I think the way to check this is that someone would have to come up with a specific theory that explains the currently-poorly-understood low-level behavior of fundamental particles based on the idea that the rules of their behavior depend on their higher-level organization.
So there is no conclusive proof either way.
This is what I suspected. But is there anyone studying quantum physics from this perspective? I'd like to see a theory of quantum physics based on this idea, but it's not my field at all. I'm wondering if anyone has looked into it from this perspective before.
Basically the evidence is the opposite of what you hope it will be.
Can you please substantiate this claim?
I have a philosophical theory which implies some things empirically about quantum physics, and I was wondering if anyone knowledgeable on the subject could give me some insight.
It goes something like this:
As an anathema to reductionists, quarks (and by "quarks" I just mean, whatever are the fundamental particles of the universe) are not governed by simple rules a la conway's game of life, but rather, like all of metaphysics goes into their behavior.
The reductionist basically reduces metaphysics to the simple rules that govern quarks. Fundamentally there is no other identity or causality, everything else is just emergent from that, anything we want to call "real" that we deal with in ordinary experience,... (read 599 more words →)
This is it! Wow. Thank you so much!
It's not a book, it's a short story
It's a story about a boy who is into science and transhumanism, and a girl he told about all these crazy things that were going to happen. He dies and all of the things he said started to happen. She ended up floating around Saturn remembering him.
Either he or she was in the wheelchair. He was dying and he was disappointed he was dying because of all the cool stuff that was going to happen that she was going to be around for, and some of it had to do with whatever problem she had that was going to get fixed.
Please help me find this story if you can.
doesn't gravity act at a distance? how is that "non-locality"?
it seems very philosophically appealing for many reasons, but I can't judge its merit as a theory of physics.
I recently stumbled upon the concept of "reflexive self-processing", which is Chris Langan's "Reality Theory".
I am not a physicist, so if I'm wrong or someone can better explain this, or if someone wants to break out the math here, that would be great.
The idea of reflexive self-processing is that in the double slit experiment for example, which path the photon takes is calculated by taking into account the entire state of the universe when it solves the wave function.
1. isn't this already implied by the math of how we know the wave function works? are there any alternate theories that are even consistent with the evidence?
2. don't we already know that the... (read more)
FYI, the english site is working again: http://intelligenceexplosion.com/en/
I highly recommend reading this, or spreading it around if you're already fluent.
This is incredible work. Thanks Luke!
Update: this paper lends some credibility to my philosophical position (neutral monism)
https://psyarxiv.com/bq7ne/