Page 394 of 463 FirstFirst ... 294344384392393394395396404444 ... LastLast
Results 11,791 to 11,820 of 13863

Thread: The last and final argument about reality.

  1. #11791
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    If I see 7 and a half apples and say they are real then it means there are 7 and half of them (apples).
    But there's not really any such thing as a half an apple, correct? So you are talking about a way of thinking about the apples, not the actual apples, right? And the other seven, if one of them is missing its stem, is that still a whole apple, or just a part of an apple? And if one of the other apples has a fleck of skin scratched off, do we still really have seven apples with a piece of an eighth, or six apples with various pieces of two more?

    The point of all this is that everything you claim is "really there" is always going to have attributes that you also claim are "really attributes" of what's there. So the adjectives are just as real for you as the nouns. However, no matter what attribute we are talking about, it always requires judgement by your brain. They will always be testably and demonstrably mind dependent, you only have to look at the attribute and look at the mind saying that attribute is present, and you will find the mind dependence. If you say there are really apples there, then you might say the apples are really made of atoms. You can't escape this, the same processes that make you say you have apples will make you say you have atoms too, it's all a series of mental judgements, it's all an act of making sense. To see this, you need only observe the act of making sense that is occurring. That it happens so automatically for you does not mean you can't see it, you merely need to dig into it a little to find it.

    So what this means is, invariably, the only way to get to MIR from MDR is to take the MDR and strip it of everything. Every attribute, every judgement, every inference, every act of making sense-- everything that could ever be tested or even used at all by the thinking being in question. This is the point of the entire thread. Most people do still believe the MIR is there, after they've stripped their MDR of everything, but they cannot use what is left for anything. What's left makes no predictions, motivates no observations, and informs no decisions of any kind, all of which is completely demonstrable in a testable way. It is therefore nothingness itself, at least from any scientifically observable point of view.

    This is what I find so ironic about what gets called realism-- "realists" always come down to saying that all that is physical is made of a stripped-down nothingness that has no attributes you could name. Which, of course, is the opposite of physical.

  2. #11792
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by malaidas View Post
    so 8 is being used as a description of something real here, yes its a more general concept than say a tiger, cause it is describing something a little more abstract about reality, but it is still describing something real.
    Yes, the MDR includes the concept that 8 is a description of something real. It is a real attribute of the something. It is also a demonstrably mind dependent attribute of the something. This is the whole point-- so it will be with every single attribute of anything, that is the testable claim of the MDR hypothesis. So now all the scientist is left to do is take any situation where it is claimed that what is really there involves some attribute or property, any situation at all, and test it-- test that the attribute or property would need to be stripped away to avoid all mind dependence. The way that goes is, the MIR believer would end up having to say, the reality might not actually have that property, I could be mistaken, but if so it would then have some other property that I don't know about and am mistaking for the property I think. But that's just what I mean about stripping it of everything useful.

    What it comes down to is anytime an MIR believer claims "the reality is A", they must actually mean "the reality might actually be something other than A but I relate to it as though it was A." Then we need only ask them, "so which do you ever use or test, the A, or the something other than A?" In other words, if you think there are 8 apples on a table, but there might actually be a very different reality there, then what do you test, and what do you make decisions based on? The idea that there are 8 apples there, that's what you need because the way you think about the reality is the only thing you can actually test or use to help you function.

  3. #11793
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    finally on this numbers issue

    lets look at this issue as something a little more empirical science.

    Question 1: does GR describe something real?
    Question 2: do numbers describe something real?

    well for question 1, we have made countless observations that show the model works in describing reality, and thus we can say that scientifically speaking it is correctly modelling it, with respect to our current knowledge. Now if we add in MIR here, then in order to be in line with 'tigers' we have to say that GR is real, in precisely the same way. It refers to properties of space/time that are observable, they are testable

    so question 2, we can look at this in the same light. we can put a collection of any number of objects on a table, and anyone versed in the knowledge of integer counting, can go in there and count them and report the result. Now allowing for human error here, especially if the number was large, we can reasonably predict that anyone who counted them correctly would come out with the same answer. That is the model has objective correctness. If this is the case, then something 'real' has been observed and accurately described by the model of integers. Just because its not as tangible as a tiger or an apple, doesn't make it any less real therefore.

    Now yes when being combined with other models such as apples we get problems like Ken describes, but the issue isn't with the reality of integers in this case, its with the model of apple. So long as you remove taxidermy from this, the issue disappears.

    ETA: of course I neglected to add that in both cases, the result is as ever provisional. With MIR you have to assert that this is true of the reality beyond our senses to the best of our knowledge etc. However the important thing is that scientifically they are as real as a tiger is real, because they accurately model observable facts.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-05 at 02:58 PM.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  4. #11794
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken G View Post
    Yes, the MDR includes the concept that 8 is a description of something real. It is a real attribute of the something. It is also a demonstrably mind dependent attribute of the something. This is the whole point-- so it will be with every single attribute of anything, that is the testable claim of the MDR hypothesis. So now all the scientist is left to do is take any situation where it is claimed that what is really there involves some attribute or property, any situation at all, and test it-- test that the attribute or property would need to be stripped away to avoid all mind dependence. The way that goes is, the MIR believer would end up having to say, the reality might not actually have that property, I could be mistaken, but if so it would then have some other property that I don't know about and am mistaking for the property I think. But that's just what I mean about stripping it of everything useful.

    What it comes down to is anytime an MIR believer claims "the reality is A", they must actually mean "the reality might actually be something other than A but I relate to it as though it was A." Then we need only ask them, "so which do you ever use or test, the A, or the something other than A?" In other words, if you think there are 8 apples on a table, but there might actually be a very different reality there, then what do you test, and what do you make decisions based on? The idea that there are 8 apples there, that's what you need because the way you think about the reality is the only thing you can actually test or use to help you function.
    We kind of crossed posts here, I was kind of saying a similar thing about numbers to Gzhpcu, when looked at in a more scientific light. Totally agree, its plainly obvious that we simply don't ever know if our thoughts about things, are ever going to match up to a reality outside of them, except in so far as we can test if our models are consistent with what we can observe. We can never do anything better than that, and yes every single bit of that is mind dependent
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  5. #11795
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken G View Post
    But there's not really any such thing as a half an apple, correct? So you are talking about a way of thinking about the apples, not the actual apples, right? And the other seven, if one of them is missing its stem, is that still a whole apple, or just a part of an apple? And if one of the other apples has a fleck of skin scratched off, do we still really have seven apples with a piece of an eighth, or six apples with various pieces of two more?

    The point of all this is that everything you claim is "really there" is always going to have attributes that you also claim are "really attributes" of what's there. So the adjectives are just as real for you as the nouns. However, no matter what attribute we are talking about, it always requires judgement by your brain. They will always be testably and demonstrably mind dependent, you only have to look at the attribute and look at the mind saying that attribute is present, and you will find the mind dependence. If you say there are really apples there, then you might say the apples are really made of atoms. You can't escape this, the same processes that make you say you have apples will make you say you have atoms too, it's all a series of mental judgements, it's all an act of making sense. To see this, you need only observe the act of making sense that is occurring. That it happens so automatically for you does not mean you can't see it, you merely need to dig into it a little to find it.

    So what this means is, invariably, the only way to get to MIR from MDR is to take the MDR and strip it of everything. Every attribute, every judgement, every inference, every act of making sense-- everything that could ever be tested or even used at all by the thinking being in question. This is the point of the entire thread. Most people do still believe the MIR is there, after they've stripped their MDR of everything, but they cannot use what is left for anything. What's left makes no predictions, motivates no observations, and informs no decisions of any kind, all of which is completely demonstrable in a testable way. It is therefore nothingness itself, at least from any scientifically observable point of view.

    This is what I find so ironic about what gets called realism-- "realists" always come down to saying that all that is physical is made of a stripped-down nothingness that has no attributes you could name. Which, of course, is the opposite of physical.
    why isn't there half an apple.? Approximately, of course. If a stem is missing, it is an apple without a stem, an apple with scratched skin is still an apple. What is so complicated about that? Seems pretty straightforward to me.

    I never said a number or an attribute was not real as an adjective, just that it can only exist as an adjective and not an object, hence it is not real as a standalone object. It exists only in the presence of an object.

  6. #11796
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    why isn't there half an apple.?
    Well, if your mind says there's a half an apple, then for you, there is. My mind says half an apple is impossible in any "mind independent" sense, because it cannot be exactly half an apple, and the MIR would have to be what is exactly real. Ergo, there are no "half apples" in an MIR. However, since I always use MDR, I will easily talk about the reality of half an apple, even if it is a little more or a little less than half. That's because what I mean by a half an apple clearly depends on choices that my mind makes-- it's very obviously not in any MIR.
    Approximately, of course.
    Precisely-- approximately. Now you have it-- does an MIR include "approximations", or is approximating something a mind does? This is what I mean by how easy it is to test these claims, as soon as we notice the appearance of approximations, we see the role of mental analysis, plain as day.
    If a stem is missing, it is an apple without a stem, an apple with scratched skin is still an apple. What is so complicated about that? Seems pretty straightforward to me.
    Of course it is straightforward, our minds do straightforward things all the time. We know what we mean by "a whole apple", but it's clearly a choice our mind is making. We can observe this choice being made, just look.

    I never said a number or an attribute was not real as an adjective, just that it can only exist as an adjective and not an object, hence it is not real as a standalone object.
    Ah, so now we have gradations of real. Is it not getting even more obvious the role of a mind, when we have gradations of realness? I mean, does the MIR contain gradations of realness, or is it just plain what's real?
    Last edited by Ken G; 2017-Apr-05 at 08:42 PM.

  7. #11797
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Depew, NY
    Posts
    12,046
    I see half an apple as a translation error. There is exactly one half of one as a concept, but generally speaking "half a ham sandwich" is either part of ham sandwich or just a really small ham sandwich. How would you know if someone made one half of a sandwich or made one sandwich, ate half and served you the other half? Applying math to language is going to fail at least half the time because of language.

    Heck, I bet in some languages you can't say "half". Base-3 is going come out "0.bar1" or however you say that.
    Solfe

  8. #11798
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    and this is precisely the point solfe, all our descriptive models are idealisations of reality, accurate enough to fit our needs. be it Apple's or whatever. They all describe something about reality but they are not reality except that in a sense they are because they feed into our reality concept, the signature of our mind is everywhere within our perception of reality. the problem occurs when you try to apply this as a description of MIR because then you really do have to keep our models and reality separate which in practice (as Ken says) means you really can't say anything about it at the deepest level.

    you are basically trying to describe the world in which you don't exist, which is like being blindfolded taken to a strange place, tied to a chair, and then trying to describe what's behind your head without looking. you could not know if what you thought was the case was true or not.

    even if, some of MIR makes its way through to your awareness. which in this analogy would be equivalent to the blindfold being taken off, you still can't look around so to describe what's behind you would be pure belief based upon your interpretation of what you saw in front of you... Plato's Cave in effect. we can't even know if there is anything behind us at all, we can think that there must be, but we cannot test this.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-06 at 07:27 AM.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  9. #11799
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    this is MDR in a nutshell and its truth is plain to see. we might see shadows for instance and thus decide there must be a light source. behind us casting shadows of the objects we cannot see, which is analogous to concept that we can demonstrate there is an MIR. the problem is we cannot know if they are real shadows or just part of the floor. however even if they are and thus we get a slight shape of what is behind us. we are still only conjecturing what is there to cast the shadows, in other words whether or not we are correct, the signature of our mind is all over our conclusions, someone who thought differently to you might reach very different conclusions and there is no way to test who is correct, so long as what they are saying would match the shadows observed.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-06 at 07:39 AM.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  10. #11800
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    now to take this a step further we might imagine that we are alone in the room with a headset on, into which we can communicate with other people. we talk and from this we can determine we seem to be in the same situation and through discussion establish that we seem to be seeing the same patterns and we might establish a concenensus view as to what they are. or we might not but we still cannot test our conclusions beyond the fact they work and we have consensus on this. We now have objective reality. in an MDR sense and are still no closer to establishing if there even is a light source behind us creating those shadows.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-06 at 07:55 AM. Reason: auto correct
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  11. #11801
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    obviously this analogy is crude, it contains a couple of flaws because it's a simplification of the reality where we have instruments to measure etc etc. but the basic truth is still the same. You cannot directly test MIR. you can only test the shadows that may or may not have an MIR source. Equally whether or not they have an MIR source doesn't matter to the testing.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  12. #11802
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Sounds like Plato's cave....

  13. #11803
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken G View Post
    Well, if your mind says there's a half an apple, then for you, there is. My mind says half an apple is impossible in any "mind independent" sense, because it cannot be exactly half an apple, and the MIR would have to be what is exactly real. Ergo, there are no "half apples" in an MIR. However, since I always use MDR, I will easily talk about the reality of half an apple, even if it is a little more or a little less than half. That's because what I mean by a half an apple clearly depends on choices that my mind makes-- it's very obviously not in any MIR.
    Precisely-- approximately. Now you have it-- does an MIR include "approximations", or is approximating something a mind does? This is what I mean by how easy it is to test these claims, as soon as we notice the appearance of approximations, we see the role of mental analysis, plain as day.
    Of course it is straightforward, our minds do straightforward things all the time. We know what we mean by "a whole apple", but it's clearly a choice our mind is making. We can observe this choice being made, just look.

    Ah, so now we have gradations of real. Is it not getting even more obvious the role of a mind, when we have gradations of realness? I mean, does the MIR contain gradations of realness, or is it just plain what's real?
    why? We say half, but do not mean half down to the last atom. Never encountered anyone having trouble with half an apple until now. I think you see things much more complicated than they are. MIR does not bother with terms. Semantics is our invention. We must be careful not to overdo it.
    Last edited by gzhpcu; 2017-Apr-06 at 09:47 AM.

  14. #11804
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Sounds like Plato's cave....
    it is as I said, based upon it, because its a useful analogy. I just put it into MDR context and added in/took out a few things.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  15. #11805
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    why? We say half, but do not mean half down to the last atom. Never encountered anyone having trouble with half an apple until now. I think you see things much more complicated than they are. MIR does not bother with terms. Semantics is our invention. We must be careful not to overdo it.
    what it means is that 2 people might classify this differently, so the truth of half an apple or any object is not mind independent. but then neither is the truth of something being an apple in the first place. ON the other hand in another sense it is a real truth to the extent of accuracy you wanted to express. Apples are real in a mind dependent sense, apples are not real in a mind independent sense, given MIR, the thing that we have classified as an apple, the two pieces of the thing, that we are classifying as half apples are real.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  16. #11806
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    The problems begin when you bring the mind into it. MDR, as seen above, leads to bockering over semantics.

  17. #11807
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    The problems begin when you bring the mind into it. MDR, as seen above, leads to bockering over semantics.
    Its not just semantics, its truth., but seeing as this debate has been going on for nigh on 2 years now and there is no end in sight I don't expect you to accept that lol.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  18. #11808
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    I think,it will be a case of who lives longest...

  19. #11809
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    I'm like a bad penny...
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  20. #11810
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Solfe View Post
    I see half an apple as a translation error.
    It's not a translation error, it's just a translation, period. But that's the whole point-- everything that we regard as real is also a form of translation, a translation from what we perceive into what our minds make of it. So it doesn't matter to me what we call a part of an apple, it matters what we make of it, in terms of what is "really there." A whole apple is no different-- could we really believe we know precisely what we are saying when we talk about a whole apple, but a half an apple requires translation? They all require translation, they are all words-- our words, not some MIR.

  21. #11811
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    The problems begin when you bring the mind into it. MDR, as seen above, leads to bockering over semantics.
    Semantics means "what our words mean." So what you are saying is, bringing the mind into it brings us to the issue of what we mean when we speak. Yes, I couldn't have said it better myself, that's exactly the point of bringing the role of the mind into it.

  22. #11812
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    I think,it will be a case of who lives longest...
    I am Malaidas and I am a reality thread addict

    if you outlive me its beacause this thread will be the death of me lol
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  23. #11813
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Be careful, realty is a serious business and someone here frowns on levity...

  24. #11814
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Be careful, realty is a serious business and someone here frowns on levity...
    oh and I was wrong.... its not 2 years its almost 3 years
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  25. #11815
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    It is like being sucked into a black hole.....

  26. #11816
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    It is like being sucked into a black hole.....
    are you saying this thread is now causing time dilation I suppose it must be reaching critical mass.
    You're really not going to like it, the meaning of life the universe and everything is.... is.... 42!
    What??????
    is that all you have to show for 7.5 million years of work?????
    it was a tricky assignment.

    "Live Long and Prosper" in memory of Leonard Nimoy
    "I think I'll change my name to Cliff. "Cliff, I can't see anyone lasting in this industry with a name like Cliff" in memory of Terry Pratchett

  27. #11817
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    We are on the event horizon....

  28. #11818
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,155
    Aha, metaphors and cliches, when all we need is some thinking. There is a BBC programme called "thinking allowed", which I used to think was "thinking aloud", no matter it's a pun, but thinking is mind based, I think we agree there, so the relation between mind and what we think reality is all about is not a black hole nor a mystery locked in an enigma, but a simple scientific hypothesis.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  29. #11819
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Kennewick, Washington
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Be careful, realty is a serious business and someone here frowns on levity...
    I know a few Realtors who would agree: "We put the real in real estate." Very serious.

    Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk

  30. #11820
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,155
    The new new scientist arrives and does not live up to its cover,"reality is real"
    The article , to save those who have not yet bought their copy, is about Bohm, and his pilot wave.
    It includes a subset which I will paraphrase for brevity.
    Under the many quises of quantum theory and hence reality:
    Copenhagen -shut up and calculate
    Many worlds- the unverse splits at every measurement
    Objective collapse -wave forms collapse all the time
    Quantum Bayesianism- it's your lack of knowledge
    Information- you extract it every measurement
    Bohmian- it's guided by pilot waves

    All these are mind based ideas of how reality works, they are Interpretations, I am sure there are more to come, Verlinde is not in that list (entanglement produces gravity)

    Let's not worry too much about tigers and half apples, reality has to be seen in quantum terms to explain observations and these interpretations are all clever mind models.

    posted in the wrong thread, apologies
    Last edited by profloater; 2017-Apr-07 at 06:05 PM. Reason: cut and paste error after wrong thread post
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •