Mole
Permabanned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,284
I don't understand that big thoughts.
What part don't you understand?
I don't understand that big thoughts.
The huge letters. By the time I get to the end, I've forgotten what it was about.
but the eyes, I think, are overlooked.
I would say the last thing I learned of profound significance is that the "orthodox" view of quantum mechanics makes randomness a fundamental part of reality. In other words, randomness at the quantum level is not just the result of hidden variables and/or chaotic behavior being approximated as random.
Was this irony intentional?
The huge letters. By the time I get to the end, I've forgotten what it was about.
Please post anything deep or profound that you learn and feel like sharing.
It has been a long time since I learned something deep or profound.
I would say the last thing I learned of profound significance is that the "orthodox" view of quantum mechanics makes randomness a fundamental part of reality. In other words, randomness at the quantum level is not just the result of hidden variables and/or chaotic behavior being approximated as random.
Please share!
You probably already know this but I find incredible that somehow I am aware of my location and what I am doing and that it is really "me" doing it yet I can't find "me" in any part of my body and neither can anyone else.
Or maybe it's a way of limiting the computational complexity of the system we're living in.
Wait, forget I said that.
Re: Marmie's Youtube observation.
Why is it that there is a fan of every piece of art, no matter how ugly or "low quality" it seems. And why are these people over expressed on Youtube?
edit - just saw that today's XKCD was relevant: http://xkcd.com/915/
I don't know how profound this is, but I'm reading a really cool book about what we're learning about the subconscious. Called "Incognito, the secret lives of the brain." It pretty much talks about how reality is very much changed and "watered down" by our consciousness.
Many physics-minded people are prone to declaring that quantum uncertainty is epistemological in nature. In fact, it is physical, or as physical as can be.
Although, where you say "fundamental part of reality," perhaps it is better to say it is a fundamental part of THAT reality, i.e., the quantum world. Such dualism is perhaps the only way to save ourselves from a complete skepticism regarding knowing the world around us. It also blocks the naivist approach of those who believe that the causality which rules the macro realm of common sense must also rule that of the sub-atomic.
The weird results of the double-slit experiment may easily be ruled out as an effect of the measuring instruments. However, in recent years some very complex experiments have been made which rule out those effects. The particles involved are not being affected during the process of measurement. It seems, in fact, that the results are being affected by the mind of the one viewing the results, whether they involve subatomic particles, atoms, buckyball molecules - or even objects on a size-level viewable by the naked eye, that is, the macro realm.
The sub-atomic realm consists, quite literally, of information, not of objects. The macro realm, under some carefully guided circumstances, can be made to appear the same way. These objects are thus not ruled by the laws of causality, but the laws of chance which determine the status of information. They are no longer what we would normally call "objects" except as a way of bringing them under the guise of normal everyday circumstance (e.g., kinetic energy).
The concept of connection. Blows me away every time I think of it.