Notices
Results 1 to 26 of 26
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By JClark
  • 1 Post By JClark
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr

Thread: Choice and Existence

  1. #1 Choice and Existence 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6
    One could argue that every moment in time our minds make an infinite number of different choices, thereby creating an infinite number of different realities every moment. I would argue that the only realities which sentient life experiences are those in which we, in the future, create a simulation of our own universe using starting conditions of the big bang (after 1 tP perhaps). This would conveniently be possible using quantum computers.

    The likelihood of us existing is approximately zero, but in an infinite sea of information anything that is possible happens. We talk about our likelihood in terms of physical events but we ignore concepts such as choice and belief. There have been so many unlikely coincidental evens in human history, such as similar myths and strangely accurate predictions. For the first time in human history we are now able to destroy ourselves and eliminate our chance to create ourselves through simulation. Once we do create ourselves through simulation our existance will no longer be essential as we would have created an additional universe within our own. This leads to an infinite fractal of universe within universe, each being identical at the moment which a simulation accurately leads to the present moment in time.

    I would argue that there is an extremely thin band of possible choices and events in history which lead to us surviving long enough to simulate ourselves, so in that time we exist in a thin band of realities. After we have simulated ourselves reality flares off into an increasingly wide range of realities, all of which lead to our eventual extinction.Before we create the simulation we need to make sure that our future is secure. If we do not then there are a very wide range of realities which lead to our quick extinction rather than long term survival.

    First post, thanks for reading. Please let me know if my thinking is totally off and how. I have little experience with physics other than a degree but I love thinking about this stuff. I plan to write a book in the next five years with all proceeds going to charity. I also have ideas regarding fundamental reward systems built into our psychology and I'm interested in making a connection between quantum physics and psychology.

    There is but 1 choice: I am.


    Last edited by JClark; December 25th, 2013 at 12:49 PM.
    Weterman likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Well if you plan to write a book don't make it read like your post.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Well if you plan to write a book don't make it read like your post.
    I appreciate the feedback but can you tell me what about it doesn't read well? I'm not disagreeing, I'd just like to know. Thanks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    The physics sub-forum is for physics--imagine that.

    Moved to philosophy.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    The physics sub-forum is for physics--imagine that.Moved to philosophy.
    Fair enough, thanks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    It's your first post and looks like cut and paste spam.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    It's your first post and looks like cut and paste spam.
    I just posted this in 2 places total. If that's not allowed I can delete. But other than that - does it really not read well? If not I'd honestly like to know so that I can edit it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Infinity times zero is indeterminate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Infinity times zero is indeterminate.
    I would argue that zero is the only number which exists. The rest is all imaginary. We are like characters in a book being played out, thinking we exist.
    Weterman likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by JClark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Infinity times zero is indeterminate.
    I would argue that zero is the only number which exists. The rest is all imaginary. We are like characters in a book being played out, thinking we exist.
    OK. You can think whatever you want but, mathematics might ruin your book before you write it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by JClark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Infinity times zero is indeterminate.
    I would argue that zero is the only number which exists. The rest is all imaginary. We are like characters in a book being played out, thinking we exist.
    OK. You can think whatever you want but, mathematics might ruin your book before you write it.
    That's exactly the sort of thing I need to check out before writing. Can you explain why?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    I'm thinking you have to do some research.

    This is a good website:

    Wolfram MathWorld: The Web's Most Extensive Mathematics Resource
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by JClark View Post
    One could argue that every moment in time our minds make an infinite number of different choices, thereby creating an infinite number of different realities every moment.
    Our brains only generates a limited number of options based on processing in the central nervous system, non of them are different realities.

    I would argue that the only realities which sentient life experiences are those in which we, in the future, create a simulation of our own universe

    We experience all sorts of things not of our own making.

    and onward....it reads a lot like a word salad....

    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    I'm interested in making a connection between quantum physics and psychology.
    Oh dear.

    Please get formal qualifications in one, preferably both, before taking this idea any further.

    (I asked my husband for "advice" on this - I was half joking. He pointed out that the links between quantum mechanics and the rest of physics is still not settled. More importantly, physicists often joke that chemistry is only applied physics. That sounds good until you try to predict the outcome/ processes of particular chemistry reactions/ equations using physics - not a universally successful enterprise. Then you try and reverse this notion from the other end in terms of your objective, how clear is the relationship between psychology and brain chemistry? Seeing as we still don't know how most/ any psycho-active drugs work (or fail), we're a long way from any clear, let alone definitive, link between psychology and chemistry.

    The time needed to have gone through the number of scientific steps needed to complete the link/s, if there is one, between quantum physics and psychology is decades - if not centuries - away.)
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,785
    One Christmas, as a present for me, I'd like a philosophy topic that's worth reading.
    Next year maybe Santa?

    (Although, apparently, I did get a cynicism top-up this year. Maybe it came along with the Doctor's extra regenerations...)
    Halliday likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    In response to the O.P., I do not understand your thoughts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    One Christmas, as a present for me, I'd like a philosophy topic that's worth reading.

    What are, according to you, some philosophical topics worth reading?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor scoobydoo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    What are, according to you, some philosophical topics worth reading?
    The three laws of robotics?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by scoobydoo1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    What are, according to you, some philosophical topics worth reading?
    The three laws of robotics?

    How so?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    What are, according to you, some philosophical topics worth reading?
    Something where actual argument is presented. Support (whether valid or not).
    Reason, rationality and logic.
    Even if it it's wrong it's bound to be better than empty claims coupled with wild unsupported speculation.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    82
    "One could argue that every moment in time our minds make an infinite number of different choices, thereby creating an infinite number of different realities every moment"

    JClark


    First off we would have to define a "moment in time", and secondly we would have to have an infinite amount of time to make an infinite amount of choices.

    There are more likely a finite number of choices we can make and it is more likely we make that choice in a period of time much longer than the moment of time you imagine. If you consider a moment in time to be 1 Planck time (roughly 10−43 seconds) then you are out of luck on that one because our brains process at much slower rates, so require much longer periods of time to make a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor scoobydoo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    How so?
    I've recently been reading Asimov's novels again during my spare time, and they have never failed to make my mind wonder about the concept of self identity, self identification, identity, and identification. The decision making process and computational logic applied in the novels by the robots that requires framing and context seem to come so easily to them because of the differences in values assigned and associated with various subjects. Such as distinguishing the difference between human (as singular) and humanity (as a continuity of both past and present human values) as an example.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by JClark View Post
    One could argue that every moment in time our minds make an infinite number of different choices, thereby creating an infinite number of different realities every moment. I would argue that the only realities which sentient life experiences are those in which we, in the future, create a simulation of our own universe using starting conditions of the big bang (after 1 tP perhaps). This would conveniently be possible using quantum computers.
    You think that the universe can be simulated with a computer starting with the big bang? What gives you that idea?
    The likelihood of us existing is approximately zero, but in an infinite sea of information anything that is possible happens. We talk about our likelihood in terms of physical events but we ignore concepts such as choice and belief.
    How do you know choice and belief are not physical events?
    There have been so many unlikely coincidental evens in human history, such as similar myths and strangely accurate predictions.
    What strangely accurate predictions? Have you heard of confirmation bias and pareidolia?
    For the first time in human history we are now able to destroy ourselves and eliminate our chance to create ourselves through simulation.

    Once we do create ourselves through simulation our existance will no longer be essential as we would have created an additional universe within our own. This leads to an infinite fractal of universe within universe, each being identical at the moment which a simulation accurately leads to the present moment in time.
    Fractal, as you are using it here, is just a buzzword. It doesn't really have any meaning.
    I would argue that there is an extremely thin band of possible choices and events in history which lead to us surviving long enough to simulate ourselves, so in that time we exist in a thin band of realities. After we have simulated ourselves reality flares off into an increasingly wide range of realities, all of which lead to our eventual extinction.Before we create the simulation we need to make sure that our future is secure. If we do not then there are a very wide range of realities which lead to our quick extinction rather than long term survival.

    First post, thanks for reading. Please let me know if my thinking is totally off and how. I have little experience with physics other than a degree but I love thinking about this stuff. I plan to write a book in the next five years with all proceeds going to charity. I also have ideas regarding fundamental reward systems built into our psychology and I'm interested in making a connection between quantum physics and psychology.

    There is but 1 choice: I am.
    Like The Matrix, right? If I only had a nickel for every time somebody posted a "Matrix" brainstorm here. It's been done to death.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Senior Weterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Canada Saskatchewan
    Posts
    325
    I agree. I don't know why some people don't understand what you say.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Senior Weterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Canada Saskatchewan
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    You think that the universe can be simulated with a computer starting with the big bang? What gives you that idea?
    computers can simulate evolution.

    someday a computer will simulate the universe.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Senior Weterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Canada Saskatchewan
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by JClark View Post
    One could argue that every moment in time our minds make an infinite number of different choices, thereby creating an infinite number of different realities every moment.
    Our brains only generates a limited number of options based on processing in the central nervous system, non of them are different realities.





    if we simulate ourselves. the people in the simulation have different choices.

    this guy is saying that we might be a simulation created in some other universe. and they might be a simulation created by ANOTHER universe. and on and on. and we will someday create a simulation.

    so all of these simulations being made, there will be maybe infinite number of you and me. that means we will make infinite number of choices.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Masters Degree Implicate Order's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    27.4679° S, 153.0278° E
    Posts
    610
    Quote Originally Posted by scoobydoo1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    What are, according to you, some philosophical topics worth reading?
    The three laws of robotics?
    I concur. Decision theory w.r.t Artificial Intelligence is a very interesting notion that I think the opening poster was referring to.

    Consider a point in time with an algorithm that mimics life. At that point in time measurements are performed by the algorithm to assess the state of health of the algorithm in regards to the context (the environment or with AI the artifcial environment). At this point in time an array of decisions are available to the algorithm in how it steps forward in time. And a decision or no decision is made. At the next moment in time more measurements are taken to assess the state of health in the next frame of context and a decision is made and so on and so forth. At each point in time (each frame) allow the algorithm to reproduce by making an exact copy of each line of code. For robotics, you adopt the same principles but you allow as part of the algorithm to create form. The algorith decides what function this form takes. Anyway back to AI.

    Allow for an algorithm to join with another algorithm in it's decision making to provide for a context where two decisions can be made at the same time....and so on and so forth.

    Allow the environment associated with the decisions to alter periodically by measured (not critical amounts) say in a linear fashion.

    The algorithm or its composite, provided it is making wise choices ( as opposed to simply random choices by measuring the state of health at each moment and allowing for decisions that improve that state of health) can survive in an evolving context. At each frame, the algorithm or composite reproduces and so on an so forth creating a community of algorithms where natural selection can be applied to bias the more correct decisions made and allow competition to reign. The most efficient algorithm in the context flourishes.

    To achieve this we can go quantum in decision making (to allow for non-linear decision making) where an outcome is chosen from an array of choice probabilities, or alternatively we just allow each algorithm to wander in its decision path and merge with another algorithm to allow for non-linear decisions across a possible infinite number of choices. The difference between this notion and that of say 'life' is that directed decision making occurs as opposed to the effects of random chance.

    Put that in a code and I would be interested to see the outcome.

    I think perhaps this is where perhaps JClark's thought were coming from:-))
    Last edited by Implicate Order; January 20th, 2014 at 08:32 AM.
    Quidquid latine dictum, altum videtur
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Do we really have a choice or is that an illusion?
    By quantumintel in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 21st, 2009, 04:32 AM
  2. does the universe really have a choice?
    By piok_opze in forum Behavior and Psychology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 18th, 2008, 09:54 PM
  3. Fate or choice
    By DaBOB in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 8th, 2006, 10:20 PM
  4. The Choice
    By wallaby in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: November 6th, 2005, 02:50 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •