07-28-2012, 07:03 PM | #51 (permalink) |
Emperor Meow
|
That doesn't make any sense. "The planet earth is more complex than a neuron, how can we tell the position of something more complex?"
The light bulb was invented 150 years ago, and look how much we've accomplished and how much scientific discovery has accelerated in the last 100 years. Now think about what 1000 years from now looks like. |
#YOLO
|
|
07-28-2012, 08:36 PM | #52 (permalink) |
Lost in Hilbert Spice
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounded by knaves and fools
Posts: 3,460
Internets: 174266
|
If you are going to take a snapshot of anything if its not at a quantum level it's useless.
You're talking about a computer that can map the location of everything in the universe at the most basic level, if it wasn't the most basic level (neurons) it wouldn't work. If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch? I don't know what the planet earth thing is, of course if you can't locate the position of a single electron you won't be able to do it with trillions. Your experiment wouldn't work if you ignored all the other things affecting it, and those other things occur at a quantum level. Enough with the free association, the attempts at understanding quantum theory as opposed to this Newtonian determinism experiment that have helped a lot with electronics (ultra capacitors) What would you do if pauli's exclusion principle seemingly randomly dropped a rock on your computer out of nowhere? if you don't know the positions of all the electrons it could happen to you, watch out! 41 minutes in, but watch the lot. Edit : what about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_indeterminacy ' Prior to quantum physics, it was thought that (a) a physical system had a determinate state which uniquely determined all the values of its measurable properties, and conversely (b) the values of its measurable properties uniquely determined the state. Albert Einstein may have been the first person to carefully point out the radical effect the new quantum physics would have on our notion of physical state.[1]' 'Indeterminacy in measurement was not an innovation of quantum mechanics, since it had been established early on by experimentalists that errors in measurement may lead to indeterminate outcomes. However, by the later half of the eighteenth century, measurement errors were well understood and it was known that they could either be reduced by better equipment or accounted for by statistical error models. In quantum mechanics, however, indeterminacy is of a much more fundamental nature, having nothing to do with errors or disturbance.' I don't think any of this has much to do with free will, only that our modern understanding makes your experiment impossible. Michio Kaku seems to think that this indeterminacy is free will |
Last edited by Dent; 07-29-2012 at 02:52 PM. |
|
07-30-2012, 03:39 AM | #53 (permalink) | |
Emperor Meow
|
Quote:
I'm not going to pretend I know anything about quantum physics and I don't care enough about it to ever spend the time to learn about it further than reading a wikipedia article. From what i understand, currently we can only define the laws that govern really small, medium size, and really big things by using a separate set of rules for each. I perceive the medium size realm. I don't really care about the quantum one. With no knowledge of how the quantum mechanics work, I can make sense of the world around me and have become pretty good predicting things that are the sum of very small things that I don't even consider. I don't need quantum mechanics to understand how a wheel works. A neuron, although small, is part of the medium realm and is no where near as small as an electron. A neuron is more complex than a wheel but I think you overestimate it's complexity if you think you need to know it's quantum state to infer its "medium" state. Maybe the word "particle" got thrown in somewhere and that's why we are not talking about the same thing. In any case I agree, lets get back to free will if possible instead of arguing about the logistics of my hypothetical thought experiment. It like arguing a turing machine isn't possible because their is no such thing as infinitely long tape. | |
#YOLO
Last edited by THEINCREDIBLEdork; 07-30-2012 at 03:46 AM. |
||
07-30-2012, 07:42 AM | #54 (permalink) | |
Lost in Hilbert Spice
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounded by knaves and fools
Posts: 3,460
Internets: 174266
|
Quote:
"Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle is one of the fundamental concepts of Quantum Physics, and is the basis for the initial realization of fundamental uncertainties in the ability of an experimenter to measure more than one quantum variable at a time." You do need quantum mechanics to understand how a wheel works, if you didn't you wouldn't understand it, in any other universe the laws of nature could be different and you'd have nothing that bears any resemblance to a wheel. the 'small and large' scale (quantum + relativity) is only used to help us, to pretend that they don't interact is loony. Referring to the medium sized realm predictions as being 'pretty good' doesn't help with your computer, satellites don't work in the medium world without a little help from quantum physics, quantum is real and the only thing your computer will be outputting is random shit! quantum physics relates to the real world. how would you be feeding the brain (+universe) information into the computer? neuron at a time or electron at a time? | |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Word of the Day | Titan | Jibberish | 45 | 04-13-2009 05:58 PM |
The Land of the Free | DJ FC | General Chat | 5 | 11-28-2008 09:48 PM |
black gay hardcore clips | zanarezz | General Chat | 1 | 02-17-2007 02:30 PM |
USENET: a gateway to free music, programs & pron | Deadly Crescent Kick | Reviews | 26 | 09-03-2006 12:30 PM |