Page 395 of 463 FirstFirst ... 295345385393394395396397405445 ... LastLast
Results 11,821 to 11,850 of 13863

Thread: The last and final argument about reality.

  1. #11821
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Kennewick Man View Post
    I know a few Realtors who would agree: "We put the real in real estate." Very serious.

    Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk
    Yikes, I hate typos!!!!

  2. #11822
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post

    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
    But tigers and apples are more accessible. The quantum world is too abstract and inaccessible. You do not need math for tigers....

  3. #11823
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    But tigers and apples are more accessible. The quantum world is too abstract and inaccessible. You do not need math for tigers....
    so does it boil down to that you do not believe in quantum interpretations but you do believe in what you can see?
    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

  4. #11824
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    to be fair here Profloater, me and Gzhpcu were just engaging in a bit of levity as used to happen fairly regularly in the old days of this thread. we weren't being serious about black holes.

    you got to laugh when a thread which should have taken a couple of pages at most has run to 11K + posts and still hasn't really made much more progress than it had on page 10 literally the only poster (during the period where I have been posting) who has fundamentally shifted viewpoint is myself.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-07 at 11:17 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

  5. #11825
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    on the other hand as a direct result i have completed several online courses in philosophy. etc.
    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

  6. #11826
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by malaidas View Post
    to be fair here Profloater, me and Gzhpcu were just engaging in a bit of levity as used to happen fairly regularly in the old days of this thread. we weren't being serious about black holes.

    you got to laugh when a thread which should have taken a couple of pages at most has run to 11K + posts and still hasn't really made much more progress than it had on page 10 literally the only poster (during the period where I have been posting) who has fundamentally shifted viewpoint is myself.
    No I did too so its not literally only one, and I am old enough to point out that "X and I" is much better than "me and X" and this thread has mostly made me laugh, it's so funny to see the same old coming up over and over.
    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

  7. #11827
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    so does it boil down to that you do not believe in quantum interpretations but you do believe in what you can see?
    I believe in quantum interpretations, but do not necessarily take them literally. For example, the standard model is based on zero dimensional elemenrarynparticles. Fine for simplifying calculations, but who believes it literally?

  8. #11828
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    I believe in quantum interpretations, but do not necessarily take them literally. For example, the standard model is based on zero dimensional elemenrarynparticles. Fine for simplifying calculations, but who believes it literally?
    Well then do you believe the elementary particles, whatever their dimensions, are real? i.e. as real as tigers?
    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

  9. #11829
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Well then do you believe the elementary particles, whatever their dimensions, are real? i.e. as real as tigers?
    Not so sure, the whole question can not be studied directly. We are continuously probing. Look at how the whole field of elementary particles is evolving. Tigers do not. Tigers we can be sure of.

  10. #11830
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Not so sure, the whole question can not be studied directly. We are continuously probing. Look at how the whole field of elementary particles is evolving. Tigers do not. Tigers we can be sure of.
    But tigers are made of particles, and ideas about those are indeed evolving. That's why we call it MDR. We are talking about the nature of reality, the ideas of the last 100 years are relevant. If you cannot know about how particles work, it follows you cannot know how tigers work.
    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

  11. #11831
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Fine for simplifying calculations, but who believes it literally?
    Now you understand how I feel about everything we put in our MDR.
    Tigers we can be sure of.
    The more vague are our models, the more we can be sure of them. Whenever we give our models properties, we always face a tradeoff between the preciseness of the predictions we can use the model to make, and the certainty we can have that the predictions will work. Take gravity. If we define gravity as nothing but the statement that objects fall, then it almost always works, and when it doesn't (helium balloons), we find a way to understand why it doesn't by invoking some other effect that competes with gravity, rather than throwing gravity out. So we can say we are sure about gravity-- unless we give it more properties to try to use it to make quantitative predictions!

    If we do that, we might say it is a force that follows an equation found by Newton, and then we can make very good predictions. But we've lost our sureness that it exists-- we didn't know Newton's law of gravity "existed" as a true law, until we did know that it doesn't. So now we have Einstein's approach to gravity, it's even more accurate than Newton's and applies in even more situations, but we're even less "certain" that it exists-- in fact, most physicists are pretty confident that it doesn't. So when we watch the history of gravity in our MDR, we discover two interesting things: our models have become more and more accurate, and we've gone from everybody being certain of it, to only the well-educated being certain of it, to nobody being certain of it. That pretty much sums up the connection between "certainty" and the creation of a quantitatively accurate MDR. The more you are not saying anything ("over there is what we call a tiger"), the easier it is to be sure.
    Last edited by Ken G; 2017-Apr-08 at 01:47 PM.

  12. #11832
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    But tigers are made of particles, and ideas about those are indeed evolving. That's why we call it MDR. We are talking about the nature of reality, the ideas of the last 100 years are relevant. If you cannot know about how particles work, it follows you cannot know how tigers work.
    Why? Why not work with the big picture and forget the tiny details? The Standard Model does not help me understand a tiger. The tiny details will change with time. The big picture will not.

  13. #11833
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Why? Why not work with the big picture and forget the tiny details? The Standard Model does not help me understand a tiger. The tiny details will change with time. The big picture will not.
    There you have it, I regard the ideas, like Verlinde or MOND or even the godd old BB for example as the big picture.
    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

  14. #11834
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    On planets billions of light years from Earth, there are no tigers, but intelligent aliens there either think like we do and regard the universe as expanding, or they think like we used to and regard themselves as being at the center, or they've already arrived at whatever we will reach someday. Or they think some way unrelated to us. It's hard for models of the universe as a whole to be any "bigger" of a picture, so there's clearly no correlation with bigness of picture and how mind dependent it is.
    Last edited by Ken G; 2017-Apr-08 at 06:51 PM.

  15. #11835
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Why the extremes? The BB is also not so well understood. Look at how our theories of the universe have changed. Steady state, BB, possibly colliding branes, etc.

    The tiger does not need science and theoretical physics. It is in the bandwidth where we can perceive it. No rocket science needed.

  16. #11836
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,154
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Why the extremes? The BB is also not so well understood. Look at how our theories of the universe have changed. Steady state, BB, possibly colliding branes, etc.

    The tiger does not need science and theoretical physics. It is in the bandwidth where we can perceive it. No rocket science needed.
    I guess Jean Paul Sartre would agree, you exist, the tiger exists, etc. but a scientist wants to know how that came about so she does her observations and builds a story. If a "what is reality?" thread lists all the things we experience, well, it's like that quiz about "what is art?" In the version I saw art is painting, sculpture, etc, a list. But that conveys nothing about inspiration. Science investigates and builds models that predict, that's the essence. But the philosophy of science also pokes at those things we cannot know. In the brain mind model, the brain is totally reliant on inputs which are literally chemicals and tiny electrical impulses. From that it builds a whole plethora of models to make sense of those inputs. It's impressive and we can easily forget we don't have a reality sensor. I know we have said all this before.
    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

  17. #11837
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Why the extremes? The BB is also not so well understood. Look at how our theories of the universe have changed. Steady state, BB, possibly colliding branes, etc.
    Yes, that's what I said. So there's no correlation between "big pictures" and certainty, it's not just "the details" that we don't understand, it's the most fundamental possible issues surrounding our reality.
    The tiger does not need science and theoretical physics. It is in the bandwidth where we can perceive it. No rocket science needed.
    Yes, it's a tiny detail about our particular corner of a vast universe, almost to the point of complete insignificance. In short, it's the kind of thing that is easy to be sure about. But if you want the answer to "what is it that we still don't know about tigers", ask an expert on tigers, that's the person who will be able to give a much more complete answer. This is how it always is-- the things we know the least about are always the things we are most sure of, simply because we don't know what there is to question. We know that tigers exist simply because that's what we mean by the words "know", "tigers", and "exist", but it takes an expert on tigers to understand what we don't know, to understand the ambiguities in that language. And a very different mind, perhaps some alien zoologist who observes animals on many different planets, may understand things about the phrase "tigers exist" that we never dreamed of.
    Last edited by Ken G; 2017-Apr-09 at 03:11 PM.

  18. #11838
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Yes, there are layers of reality. If the subject is the tiger, I do not have to go to the subatomic level to understand it. Theoretical science comes into play, when I want to look at the very large (e.eg. the universe), or the planck level. But if I stay at my level, tigers will do quite nicely.

  19. #11839
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    I think, (before I say anything more), it bears reiterating, seeing as it hasn't been in a while, that MDR is not idealism, it doesn't concern what actually is, it concerns our knowledge of such. it stands agaibst MIR only in so far as to what we could say about such even down to its existence.
    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. #11840
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    the thing here is that something very tangible like the physical reality of a tiger seems less mind dependent than something like GR. this is simply that the mind dependency is less obvious. thus this effects your conclusion as to which is closer to MIR. but following this logic through, you end up with the simple truth, that only sonething you know nothing about can be said to be mind independent. because the more we seem to know about something, that is the closer we seemingly come to actually understanding it, the more mind dependent it becomes.

    a seeming paradox simply solved by realising you know nothing of the MIR you are claiming exists. We can believe it's out there but we can probably never be certain of anything about it.

    ETA: where idealism goes wrong is in saying tgat this means it's not actually true of MIR just because of the mind dependency of our knowledge. this is a matter of our conclusions not what is.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-09 at 04:27 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

  21. #11841
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    oh and finally for now, MDR is not epistemological solipsism, the two differ in a number of highly critical respects. enough that they don't even sit in the same ballpark.

    1) it creates a binary condition upon knowledge that MDR would dispute

    2) it creates an absolute to reality that MDR would dispute. Note that again the doesn't mean MIR doesn't in some sense exist it just means that reality is a mind dependent concept in the first place. Epistemological solipsism carries on the false dichotomy over reality that MDR disputes. Nothing in MDR says we cannot have knowledge over reality except that we exist, the statement in an MDR sense is meaningless.

    3) it fails to recognise the difference between knowledge and demonstrable 'proof' of that knowledge.

    4) the only similarity is that both would dispute knowledge of MIR. a descriptive notion of MIR is a contradiction in MDR terms, it doesn't say we actially cannot describe MIR in some fundamental way, it's merely that claim that we are or not lacks any meaning.

    just to start the ball rolling.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-09 at 05:02 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

  22. #11842
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by malaidas View Post

    a seeming paradox simply solved by realising you know nothing of the MIR you are claiming exists. We can believe it's out there but we can probably never be certain of anything about it.
    Just try putting your head in a tiger's mouth....

  23. #11843
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Actually if it is out there and is a potential danger to my existence, I do not care if it is MIR or MDR.....

  24. #11844
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Actually if it is out there and is a potential danger to my existence, I do not care if it is MIR or MDR.....
    precisely... now understand just why physical proofs like this don't work. just because something is mind dependent does not make it imagination as we classify things mind dependently. what it means is our perception and our understanding of which is mind dependent, and nothing you are describing removes you from the equation. We don't know beyond our mutual perceptions and our sense making of which what is going on.

    ETA: real has a meaning, and if something is real yes it's going to affect you lol. none of which makes that real thing mind independent in any sense we can talk about. Your problem is that you are creating false dichotomies, promoting things to some absolute status for a foundation where there is none.
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-09 at 05:29 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

  25. #11845
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gzhpcu View Post
    Actually if it is out there and is a potential danger to my existence, I do not care if it is MIR or MDR.....
    I don't think I'm out on any limb when I predict that no tiger will ever, ever, be a potential danger to your existence. That is not at all the reason you regard them as real. In fact, I will make a testable prediction: in your MDR, you do not regard tigers as any more real than kittens. Correct? So none of this has anything to do with threats to your existence.

  26. #11846
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    so whilst your logic asserts that there must be something beyond our perceptions and understanding to give rise to such experience, in a practical sense we can only talk about such in mind dependent terms. We can only perceive and understand such mind dependently. our reality 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

  27. #11847
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    the point isn't whether or not there are mind independent things or not... the point is that whether or not there are is irrelevant to any practical discussion to any matter of knowledge, you only know mind dependant things outside of pure personal belief.
    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

  28. #11848
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken G View Post
    I don't think I'm out on any limb when I predict that no tiger will ever, ever, be a potential danger to your existence. That is not at all the reason you regard them as real. In fact, I will make a testable prediction: in your MDR, you do not regard tigers as any more real than kittens. Correct? So none of this has anything to do with threats to your existence.
    Do not follow. So if I go to the nearby zoo, I can put my hand in the cage, according to you? Tigers and kittens are equally real. The threat to my existence, by entering the zoo's cage is not real?

  29. #11849
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lugano, Switzerland
    Posts
    7,375
    Quote Originally Posted by malaidas View Post
    so whilst your logic asserts that there must be something beyond our perceptions and understanding to give rise to such experience, in a practical sense we can only talk about such in mind dependent terms. We can only perceive and understand such mind dependently. our reality is mind dependent
    talking is one thing - experiencing is something else. If I cross the street, see a speeding car, faint out of fright, and get run over, terminating my existence, where is the mind dependency?

  30. #11850
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    4,223
    ok so lets go philosophical, what happens at that moment from the perception of others you die, but what about you. do you cease to exist, do you go to another existence etc ... who knows. it's actually rather irrelevant, it is plain that we cannot equate the personal experience of 'death' with that of observers and more so that this experience depends upon the way that observer perceives and thinks about it. for instance that individual may experiencethe sense that the person in question is not truly dead, they may feel the person is with them constantly. the argument agaibst this is science theory tgat is as you have already admitted... very much mind dependent
    Last edited by malaidas; 2017-Apr-09 at 09:37 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

Posting Permissions

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