“Reality Goes Beyond Physics,” and more

[peacegirl]

You cannot prove a fantasy: you can only surmise.

 

[Jarhyn]

It's not how determinism is defined.

Dude, I presented you everything you would need to do to construct a perfectly deterministic flatland universe that you can hold actual block frames in your hand.

You do not understand determinism.

Quit pretending ignorance is the equal of reasoned thought.

 

[pood]

So true!

Do you own, or could you perhaps procure the use of, a mirror?

No Bilby, I have listened to many worlds beliefs and other fictions but the evidence for determinism (not hard or soft) is airtight The very definition of determinism doesn’t allow for deviation or “could have done otherwise.” The belief that QM saves free will on a macro level is

Please, for once in your life, try to read for comprehension and stop distorting or ignoring what other people say. NO ONE SAID QM IS NEEDED TO SAVE FREE WILL ON A MACRO LEVEL. Can you follow an all-caps statement better? What I said, was the QM makes HARD DETERMINISM false, though it is already false because of compatibilism. QM just makes it all the more ruled out.

ludicrous and more importantly does nothing to alter what we observe in actuality. Injecting QM into the real world (i.e., the world we experience on a daily basis) is a playful thought experiment only. But what if it were true?

It is true. Half-life radioactive decay, a quantum indeterminate event, leads to mutations that drive the evolution of species. It has recently been discovered that plants exploit quantum mechanics in photosynthesis. It is believed that qm events enter into microtubules in the brain. There are other examples. Please get an education.

The world would not only be undetermined, it would be chaotic where nothing could be trusted or counted on. Jeffrey Dahmer could become the Pope and the Pope could become a mass murderer. After all, anything would be possible in a world where one’s genetics and environment would have no effect on one’s decisions. It would be helter skelter with no possibility to predict anything and therefore no way to learn from past mistakes. Using QM as a defense for compatibilist free will is undermining true progress where the possibility of world peace is within our grasp.

QM IS NOT BEING USED TO DEFEND COMPATIBILIST FREE WILL.

And, what you said above about a fully chaotic world is precisely in accord with COMPATIBILISM, that we need what is now called an “adequate” or averaged-out determinism to reliably do things. Thank you for inadvertently supporting compatibilism.

 

[peacegirl]

So true!

Do you own, or could you perhaps procure the use of, a mirror?

No Bilby, I have listened to many worlds beliefs and other fictions but the evidence for determinism (not hard or soft) is airtight The very definition of determinism doesn’t allow for deviation or “could have done otherwise.” The belief that QM saves free will on a macro level is

Please, for once in your life, try to read for comprehension and stop distorting or ignoring what other people say. NO ONE SAID QM IS NEEDED TO SAVE FREE WILL ON A MACRO LEVEL. Can you follow an all-caps statement better? What I said, was the QM makes HARD DETERMINISM false, though it is already false because of compatibilism. QM just makes it all the more ruled out.

ludicrous and more importantly does nothing to alter what we observe in actuality. Injecting QM into the real world (i.e., the world we experience on a daily basis) is a playful thought experiment only. But what if it were true?

It is true. Half-life radioactive decay, a quantum indeterminate event, leads to mutations that drive the evolution of species. It has recently been discovered that plants exploit quantum mechanics in photosynthesis. It is believed that qm events enter into microtubules in the brain. There are other examples. Please get an education.

The world would not only be undetermined, it would be chaotic where nothing could be trusted or counted on. Jeffrey Dahmer could become the Pope and the Pope could become a mass murderer. After all, anything would be possible in a world where one’s genetics and environment would have no effect on one’s decisions. It would be helter skelter with no possibility to predict anything and therefore no way to learn from past mistakes. Using QM as a defense for compatibilist free will is undermining true progress where the possibility of world peace is within our grasp.

QM IS NOT BEING USED TO DEFEND COMPATIBILIST FREE WILL.

And, what you said above about a fully chaotic world is precisely in accord with COMPATIBILISM, that we need what is now called an “adequate” or averaged-out determinism to reliably do things. Thank you for inadvertently supporting compatibilism.

Then are you defending then? I have explained to you ad nauseam that doing what you want to do does not grant you free will. You’re using it to undermine determinism in the dimension where we all live, breathe, and die. We are either compelled by laws over which we have no control or we aren’t. QM is being used to defend free will by your definition of averaging out. What the hell does that mean? We don’t judge human behavior by averages when it comes down to proof. This whole effort to make free will compatible with determinism has lost its bearings and has now become a wish upon a star.

 

[Jarhyn]

It is believed that qm events enter into microtubules in the brain.

I've said this a few times and in a few places, there is a much stronger and more likely hypothesis as to the function of such tubules in the neural network of the brain, with other plausible related hypotheses, that don't involve the assumption of magical spirit antennas.

Chief among these, to me, is the "<err_name_not_found>" theory of microtubule action:

Imagine a tiny gear with few teeth, turning against a similarly tiny gear. A principle of such gears at such scales is the unsmoothness of their motion: as the gears interconnect, the fulcrum of motion between them shifts to and from one gear center to the other.

Now let's imagine that these gears have imperfectly lubricated shafts, and that they tend to bind after not having moved, such that the energy to get them going is occasionally going to be higher than the leverage the first gear puts on the second, according to where that fulcrum sits.

This means that if the system regularly stops, the only way to get the system started from certain stops is to add a bit of momentary disruption.

This can be accomplished by anything that overcomes the initial bit of resistance: you could drum on the gears, or perhaps just scream loudly at them and shake the axle of the second gear enough to free it, depending.

Further, one nice thing about QM wiggling is that it occurs at consistent rates. Having some uniform sort of structure can very well allow the smooth coordination of time across a large scale system, like everyone in the world having a watch that counts on average one second per second allows fairly good synchronization following any given act of coordination.

As humans looking at these things, it's fairly easy to say "what would I use a machine like that for, in constricting a bigger machine". This is a machine that both provides structure and predictably unpredictable, very tiny, wigglings. I just said what I would try to use that for.

 

[pood]

So true!

Do you own, or could you perhaps procure the use of, a mirror?

No Bilby, I have listened to many worlds beliefs and other fictions but the evidence for determinism (not hard or soft) is airtight The very definition of determinism doesn’t allow for deviation or “could have done otherwise.” The belief that QM saves free will on a macro level is

Please, for once in your life, try to read for comprehension and stop distorting or ignoring what other people say. NO ONE SAID QM IS NEEDED TO SAVE FREE WILL ON A MACRO LEVEL. Can you follow an all-caps statement better? What I said, was the QM makes HARD DETERMINISM false, though it is already false because of compatibilism. QM just makes it all the more ruled out.

ludicrous and more importantly does nothing to alter what we observe in actuality. Injecting QM into the real world (i.e., the world we experience on a daily basis) is a playful thought experiment only. But what if it were true?

It is true. Half-life radioactive decay, a quantum indeterminate event, leads to mutations that drive the evolution of species. It has recently been discovered that plants exploit quantum mechanics in photosynthesis. It is believed that qm events enter into microtubules in the brain. There are other examples. Please get an education.

The world would not only be undetermined, it would be chaotic where nothing could be trusted or counted on. Jeffrey Dahmer could become the Pope and the Pope could become a mass murderer. After all, anything would be possible in a world where one’s genetics and environment would have no effect on one’s decisions. It would be helter skelter with no possibility to predict anything and therefore no way to learn from past mistakes. Using QM as a defense for compatibilist free will is undermining true progress where the possibility of world peace is within our grasp.

QM IS NOT BEING USED TO DEFEND COMPATIBILIST FREE WILL.

And, what you said above about a fully chaotic world is precisely in accord with COMPATIBILISM, that we need what is now called an “adequate” or averaged-out determinism to reliably do things. Thank you for inadvertently supporting compatibilism.

Then are you defending then? I have explained to you ad nauseam that doing what you want to do does not grant you free will. Stop lying.

Reporting the lying accusation.

You’re using it to undermine determinism in the dimension where we live, breathe, and die. We are either compelled by laws over which we have no control or we aren’t. QM is being used to defend free will by your definition of averaging out.

NO IT IS NOT. Compatibilism stands alone without any reference to QM whatsoever. QM shows that HARD determinism cannot be right. Compatibilism is SOFT determinism.

What the hell does that mean? We don’t judge human behavior by averages when it comes down to proof. This whole effort to make free will compatible with determinism has lost its bearings and has now become a wish upon a star.

You are totally unable to follow this discussion.

 

[pood]

Your lying accusation has been reported, as well as informing the mods of repeated instances of your ad hom arguments. Each and every further violation of the rules will be reported.

 

[bilby]

You cannot prove a fantasy: you can only surmise.

That mirror would really be an excellent investment.

Just saying.

 

[peacegirl]

You cannot prove a fantasy: you can only surmise.

That mirror would really be an excellent investment.

Just saying.

You’re lost Bilby. I cannot get through to a blank wall.

 

[peacegirl]

So true!

Do you own, or could you perhaps procure the use of, a mirror?

No Bilby, I have listened to many worlds beliefs and other fictions but the evidence for determinism (not hard or soft) is airtight The very definition of determinism doesn’t allow for deviation or “could have done otherwise.” The belief that QM saves free will on a macro level is

Please, for once in your life, try to read for comprehension and stop distorting or ignoring what other people say. NO ONE SAID QM IS NEEDED TO SAVE FREE WILL ON A MACRO LEVEL. Can you follow an all-caps statement better? What I said, was the QM makes HARD DETERMINISM false, though it is already false because of compatibilism. QM just makes it all the more ruled out.

ludicrous and more importantly does nothing to alter what we observe in actuality. Injecting QM into the real world (i.e., the world we experience on a daily basis) is a playful thought experiment only. But what if it were true?

It is true. Half-life radioactive decay, a quantum indeterminate event, leads to mutations that drive the evolution of species. It has recently been discovered that plants exploit quantum mechanics in photosynthesis. It is believed that qm events enter into microtubules in the brain. There are other examples. Please get an education.

The world would not only be undetermined, it would be chaotic where nothing could be trusted or counted on. Jeffrey Dahmer could become the Pope and the Pope could become a mass murderer. After all, anything would be possible in a world where one’s genetics and environment would have no effect on one’s decisions. It would be helter skelter with no possibility to predict anything and therefore no way to learn from past mistakes. Using QM as a defense for compatibilist free will is undermining true progress where the possibility of world peace is within our grasp.

QM IS NOT BEING USED TO DEFEND COMPATIBILIST FREE WILL.

And, what you said above about a fully chaotic world is precisely in accord with COMPATIBILISM, that we need what is now called an “adequate” or averaged-out determinism to reliably do things. Thank you for inadvertently supporting compatibilism.

Then are you defending then? I have explained to you ad nauseam that doing what you want to do does not grant you free will. Stop lying.

Reporting the lying accusation.

You’re using it to undermine determinism in the dimension where we live, breathe, and die. We are either compelled by laws over which we have no control or we aren’t. QM is being used to defend free will by your definition of averaging out.

NO IT IS NOT. Compatibilism stands alone without any reference to QM whatsoever. QM shows that HARD determinism cannot be right. Compatibilism is SOFT determinism.

What the hell does that mean? We don’t judge human behavior by averages when it comes down to proof. This whole effort to make free will compatible with determinism has lost its bearings and has now become a wish upon a star.

You are totally unable to follow this discussion.

I have legitimate concerns over your belief that QM somehow disproves determinism. QM is just one of your false accusations, not the only one. You’ve been giving QM credit to do what it is incapable of doing (ie., jumping from the motion and interaction of subatomic particles to being capable of ruling out human decision-making on a macro level, which is not free.

 

[steve_bank]

Peacegirl it is not just pood invoking QM.

A long running debate in both science and philosophy began from the start of QM as to whether the universe is fundamentally probabilistic or indeterminate versus deterministic.

It is not settled and there are multiple views and interventions of QM. QM as in actuality physical measurements and experiments, not abstract metaphysics.

If y0o want to dismiss Heisenberg and Bohr you really are ignorant, you may not even know who they were.

QM is a commojn well used theory used daily inn technology, for example designing and manufacturing the processor in your computer.

Copenhagen interpretation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I have to agree with pood, you are crossing over to blatant ad moms to cover your ass and your ignorance.

 

[peacegirl]

Peacegirl it is not just pood invoking QM.

A long running debate in both science and philosophy began from the start of QM as to whether the universe is fundamentally probabilistic or indeterminate versus deterministic.

It is not settled and there are multiple views and interventions of QM. QM as in actuality physical measurements and experiments, not abstract metaphysics.

If y0o want to dismiss Heisenberg and Bohr you really are ignorant, you may not even know who they were.

QM is a commojn well used theory used daily inn technology, for example designing and manufacturing the processor in your computer.

Copenhagen interpretation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I have to agree with pood, you are crossing over to blatant ad moms to cover your ass and your ignorance.

When you say that this debate has is of no consequence, I’ve lost all interest in anything you have to say. Tootaloo!

 

[pood]

@peacegirl, I am replying to a post I have deleted because it is also being reported.

I have already explained this. Compatibilism, which is soft determinism, works perfectly well with determinism. Only HARD determinism is used against compatibilism. QM only figures into the discussion because it shows the world is fundamentally indeterministic anyway, and, as I’ve noted with several examples, QM effect scale up into the real world. You are too ignorant of this subject to realize that your computer and practically all high-tech must take into account and use QM.

 

[pood]

It appears peacegirl edited out her newest accusation of lying.

ETA: Oh, wait, she has not. I was looking at a different post. Very well, reporting now.

 

[peacegirl]

@peacegirl, I am replying to a post I have deleted because it is also being reported.

I have already explained this. Compatibilism, which is soft determinism, works perfectly well with determinism. Only HARD determinism is used against compatibilism. QM only figures into the discussion because it shows the world is fundamentally indeterministic anyway, and, as I’ve noted with several examples,

There is no such thing as hard and soft determinism. It’s a conjured up definition. Determinism, according to philosophy on this subject, means one thing and one thing only. Could you have done otherwise, and the answer is a big fat NOOOOO!

QM effect scale up into the real world. You are too ignorant of this subject to realize that your computer and practically all high-tech must take into account and use QM.

Stop trying to make me look stupid. It’s a bunch of BS to think that due to not knowing whether a wave will collapse or remain a particle that this somehow translates to compatibilist free will. It’s too great of a stretch, or is it too hard for you to see? Thank goodness QM doesn’t rise to the macro level. I would never want the Pope to be Jeffrey Dahmer!

 

[pood]

Post reported.

 

[Elixir]

It is true. Half-life radioactive decay, a quantum indeterminate event, leads to mutations that drive the evolution of species.

Not like that’s the only thing, either.
PG has an obvious emotional attachment to determinism. This is common: it gives people an illusion of control, as if very well considered action will inevitably lead to predictable and beneficial results. It totally ignores any possibility that either a determinable event might be overlooked or that an event that affects their outcome might be under some non-deterministic influence.
But it makes people feel better. After all, they “COULD” have taken the determinable event that effected the outcome under consideration.
Oh wait - no they couldn’t!
It was predetermined (in their universe) that they wouldn’t, just as it was predetermined that they would remain oblivious to non-deterministic events effecting the outcomes of their actions.

 

[bilby]

Stop trying to make me look stupid.

If you want to know who to blame for trying to make you look stupid, there's a simple tool you could employ. I have already suggested it twice.

 

[pood]

Stop trying to make me look stupid. It’s a bunch of BS to think that due to not knowing whether a wave will collapse or remain a particle that this somehow translates to compatibilist free will. It’s too great of a stretch, or is it too hard for you to see? Thank goodness QM doesn’t rise to the macro level. I would never want the Pope to be Jeffrey Dahmer!

Once again, stop misrepresenting what I say. I said QM HAS NOTHING TO DO with the argument to compatibilism.

 

[Elixir]

QM HAS NOTHING TO DO with the argument to compatibilism.

That’s not why PG is on its case. It’s just that it violates determinism. Whether or not you use it to support compatibilism it’s still the enemy of PG’s beloved determinism, and as an arguably valid point supporting compatibilism, it earns full throated opposition.
Or, as Forrest Gump said …