• Time dilation
    Special relativity only applies to inertial frames of reference - those that are not accelerating relative to each other. — T Clark

    And where does such a condition exist in the universe?

    If, on the other hand, there are two space ships at rest relative to each other and one accelerates away from the other up to a significant fraction of c then turns around and comes back and then the clocks are checked, both will observe that less time has passed on the accelerating ship. — T Clark

    Clocks may be affected by acceleration (but which one?), but this has nothing to do with biological aging. In any case, there had to be deceleration somewhere to even check the clocks.

    I also want to underscore there is no T in GTR. Only some strange variable that is called space time because the equations entangle the two concepts. However, there is no reason to elevate the equations to an ontologically status since it is about measurement and not biological evolution.
  • Time dilation
    earth doesn't experience any acceleration what so ever. — David Solman

    The Earth is not accelerating? Are you sure about this?

    How does someone on the Earth know that they are not accelerating from the spaceship?

    Where is the evidence that either equation is ontological and describes biological time/aging?

    Where is T in GTR?

    As I said, this stuff is great for Sci Fi programming but STR are about measurements and gravity not about biological aging.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    Well, the electron is where that is more probable. — bahman

    No.

    You are trying to hard to make a case for determinism/materialism. Insignificant > 0. Electrons aren't even particles.

    Schrodinger equation is a deterministic equation. — bahman

    Now it's getting ridiculous. Zero support for this statement. But it's part for the course. If one is willing to make up a myth like Determinism why not call the Schrodinger equation deterministic. It's all an illusion anyway.

    Nice talking to you.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    "Laws of nature" is often just shorthand for inductive generalizations, so materialism rests on even shakier grounds than you describe. — Thorongil

    You are being kind. I would describe it as deliberate obfuscation.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    The probability function tells you where body — bahman

    First, it tells you where the electron (not necessarily a particle) may probably be. Nothing is definite until it is observed.

    Second,predicting the probability where an electron may be is a far, far, far .... cry from explaining the evolution of everything in the universe. Determinists have to really get a hold on their proclamations. It's strange how they make this gigantic leap so easily and pretend it is some sort of scientific fact.
  • What is the mind?
    Can you not feel conscious without memory? In fact I would think that we would even more conscious without memory.

    This might also be the state of death.
    — Rich

    So in essence the mind cannot perish? In some way the mind is eternal?     — Fumani

    I cannot say that when I am in an unconscious state I feel anything and there doesn't appear to be memory in the manner I normally experience it. But there is definitely something there because I do wake up!

    Yes, the Mind appears to be eternal. It continues in many forms. But more than this, personal memory is persistent and we can actually observe it as interested, inborn, innate traits. We are all different because of the way our memory evolves.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    So what is it that you really have against "materialism"? — Harry Hindu

    That it claims to be scientific where it is simply just another faith. It has its dogma (everything is material), its God (the Laws of Nature), and its Genesis (the Big Bang). All in all, it's a manufactured religion no different from any other.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    The physicist call it standard model in which all equations related to particles movement can be derived from. — bahman
    The only equations defining particle movements are the QM equations. They relate only to the evolutionary path of electrons and are probabilistic (indeterminate events). Now how does this explain how all matter evolves in all manner? They don't even explain electrons! They just predict!!
  • Is Sunyata (Emptiness) = Reductionism?
    I see no other option but for a reductionist philosophy to be materialistic. How does one be reductionist in a non-materialistic worldview? You'd simply be building castles in the air. — TheMadFool

    It is necessary to pivot one's way of thinking to begin to understand different way of viewing life and nature. You are trying to translate using what you are reading. You have to DO in order to begin to effect change. If you try to translate a philosophy based upon unity into one that rests on materiality, you get materiality. That is why you always ended up where you started.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    ↪BlueBanana
    Physicallism makes consciousness an Illusion as you just did. But you decided to go one step further making illusions an accurate depiction of reality, which was simply great. The ultimate in meaningless.An inevitable ending when one attempts to develop all of life out of a string of bouncing particles. It is preposterous but people like playing the game.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    Yes they do. We perceive them, that perception is an illusion, that illusion is accurate and true. — BlueBanana

    Ok. We are an illusion and all illusions are accurate reality. Reality are illusions. Illusions are reality. There are no particles bouncing iiffeach other and there are. You exist and you don't. I exist and I don't. I'm talking to you and I am not. As said, everything has become meaningless. No surprise. Quite Hindu.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    This is a physicist interpretation of reality which seems coherent if there was no consciousness. We are dealing with a improbable situation when there is conscious decision. — bahman

    No physicist claims that physics provides such an explanation as you claim, nor is the term Laws of Nature used in physics. So we are back to you having to enumerate the Laws of Nature that explain how all matter evolves and reacts to stimuli?
  • What is the mind?
    Mind is that which creates. Without memory it would feel as if one is unconscious or between dream states, where there is no sense of duration, however it is still there and can awaken and reach for memory via the body it had created. This might also be the state of death.
  • Is Sunyata (Emptiness) = Reductionism?
    The fundamental problem with the OP is that it is using physicalist concepts/language to explain a non-physicalist philosophy.

    Everything is a unity. There are no parts. In does not reflect the philosophy to say something arises from something else or is the product of some parts. It is all intertwined and entangled. A holographic universe would be a closer analogy.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    No, the laws of nature just explain how simple matter evolves and reacts to a stimuli. — bahman

    Really? How so? You can start by enumerating all of the Laws of Nature that are involved with this explanation. Then you can explain how they formed conscious experience which is that what reacts to stimuli.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    The illusion is an accurate representation of the reality — BlueBanana

    You don't exist. I don't exist. Particles don't exist. Everything is an illusion.

    Actually, you have successfully turned Materialism into full-out Idealism and Illusions into Realism.

    You can work out the mess. It's not to my taste.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    Interesting religion but impossible, unless you have a God who knows everything. — bahman

    The Laws of Nature are everywhere, know everything, and are all powerful.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    ↪BlueBanana
    Find meaning in bouncing particles that are being guided by the mystical Laws of Nature. This is all there is and since this is itself an illusion, then there is nothing there other than we are all suffering from Illusions (Maya).

    At least the Hindus are honest about their philosophy. Materialists want to pretend Illusions are Scientific. Whatever.

    The moment any philosophy resorts to illusion all is finished. Now one can meditate for the rest of his/her life with the hope of breaking free of illusion. Lots of people spend their life that way.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    ↪BlueBanana
    Illusions have no meaning in the world of determinism and physicalism. They are neither reliable or unreliable. You are just an illusion of bouncing particles. Bouncing particles are just an illusion. Don't treat yourself or others otherwise. Determinism it's just an illusion. There is no meaning. Eat your food. Welcome to Hinduism. There is no escape from Maya.
  • Time dilation
    Completely false. You seem to not understand the distinction between velocity and acceleration. — noAxioms

    You don't understand STR and GTR. There is no T in GTR and STR, which has a T, states all frames of reference are equivalent. Sci Fi adherents love to mix up and intermix the two. Makes Relativity so much more fun.
  • Time dilation
    [
    ↪noAxioms
    In terms of measurement either viewpoint is equivalent. Either body can be accelerating away from the other.
  • Materialism is logically impossible
    If you want to understand materialism, just substitute God for the Laws of Nature.

    The Laws of Nature act in anyway they wish and can do anything it wishes. It can create Consciousness and make Consciousness act in any manner that it does. There is no questioning the power of the mystical Laws of Nature (an entirely invented abstract concept) that is creating the illusion of Consciousness.

    Materialism is a rather interesting religion that does not succomb to either logic or commonsense.
  • Time dilation
    Earth might be moving away from the ship, but it is not ever accelerating away from it. — noAxioms

    There is no privileged frame of reference under STR? Either viewpoint is coherent according to STR. STR doesn't allow for exceptions when it is convenient for a science fiction story.
  • Is Sunyata (Emptiness) = Reductionism?
    I was hoping for someone to attack the notion of Sunyata = reductionism because reductionism is materialistic in nature. Yet, here we have a religion (Buddhism) that seems to be, paradoxically, reductionist.

    As I said, Sunyata has a good argument behind it and materialism backs it up.     — TheMadFool

    There is no one understanding of Sunyata as each Buddhist sect approaches the idea differently, and it is not central to Buddhist thought. Only the Four Noble Truths and Eight Fold Path can be considered Central.

    With that said, despite the thousands of different interpretations of Sunyata, I have never heard of any interpretation anywhere that would be materialistic in nature. It is more diametrically opposite.
  • Belief (not just religious belief) ought to be abolished!
    ↪ProgrammingGodJordan
    Unfortunately, you are off to a rocky start. Your entire OP is a belief beginning with #1.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    You really don't seem to understand what determinism actually means. — JustSomeGuy

    You like your struggle, have it.

    Determinism is a religious belief system, similar to Calvinism, and some people simply want to believe their lives are fated despite all evidence to the contrary. That is the nature of a religion.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    ↪BlueBanana
    What perception? What is perceiving? Don't you get it? It is just bouncing balls creating illusions. All of a sudden illusions are reliable? To what?
  • Time dilation
    Earth does not accelerate away. That would require a massive force on Earth, sending it out of the solar system. — noAxioms

    Reciprocity of Special Relativity says there is no privileged frame of reference. If there is a privileged frame of reference, STR is wrong and Einstein's T is wrong. There is no T in GTR.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    This is essentially a straw man; neither I nor anyone else (in regards to this topic) claims that anything is an illusion. — JustSomeGuy

    So you think there really is a mind?

    Given what we know about our brains and the universe — JustSomeGuy

    What is the"we" and "our"? You mean the bouncing particles don't you? The brain isn't doing anything, right?

    it is perfectly reasonable to believe that the choices we make are a result of many preceding causal factors as opposed to some outside unseen force controlling our brains. — JustSomeGuy

    The brain isn't doing anything under Determinism. It's all determined by some bouncing particles governed by the mystical and undefined Laws of Nature. No particle holds any privileged position. Everything related to thinking it's just an illusion. Determinism is actually quite a hoot when it is all thought through.

    There is no free will. Just a mind making choices in action. That is all real and observable. Very simple. Exactly what the Daoists observed.

    The argument in my favor is exactly where I started. There is zero evidence for Determinism. No bouncing particle is making us believe in it. One chooses to believe in it despite all contrary evidence.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    Are you referring to the Many Worlds Interpretation? In addition to that there is also the de Broglie-Bohm Interpretation, so there are at least two prominent theories which leave determinism intact. — JustSomeGuy

    As I said, the so-called Many World's Interpretation (my description is accurate, because it is entirely fantastical in what it is suggesting) is probabilistic in this Universe (as it would be in each of the infinite number of universes that it posits). The Bohm Interpretation is real, causal but non-deterministic. He says so in his own book. It has to be because it is equivalent to the Schrodinger Equation and contains the probabilistic variable. It is impossible for any Interpretation of QM to support determinism in the Universe we live in.

    We are not computers. If you really believe that everything is an illusion, then your appropriate position in any discussion is that particles are determining everything you are thinking, you can't help it, it's all meaningless, and its the Laws of Nature that are creating the illusion that we are discussing and thinking. Why particles would want to start creating illusions of discussion is beyond me, but it's not myth it's the Determinist's myth, so I let them deal with trying to explain discussions in a universe of bouncing particles.

    As I said, no one on this forum really believes their discussions are illusions but they like pretending they do. Rather interesting.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    but many don't. — JustSomeGuy

    Really? There is only one interpretation, which is totally fantastical , the Infinitely Growing Infinite Number of Universe Interpretion, that would be deterministic if one could leap out of our Universe, but still keeps this universe probabilistic as must every other interpretation. There is no deterministic interpretation of QM. There can't be because the Schrodinger Equation is probabilistic.

    Determinism is pure faith. Nothing more. There is zero evidence to support it and hundred years of physics that says it ain't so. Choice is observed by everyone, everyday in their lives. One is free to choose what they believe. You just said so in your message. No one really believed in Determinism. It's just a game.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    ↪JustSomeGuy
    Quantum Physics supports probabilistic behavior and totally destroys Determinism. So exactly what is left? The mystical Laws of Nature. I am not a religious oriented fellow who believes everything is fated by the all-powerful Laws of Nature.

    Believe what you want, but there is zero evidence for Determinism and Quantum Physics says it ain't so. Go ahead, and continue struggling if you want. When your tired of Determinism just move on to a more sensible philosophy of the universe. The Daoist had lots of insights worth studying and actually meaningful to leading ones life.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    ↪JustSomeGuy
    I make choices all the time. Throughout my day and throughout my life. You figure I'm going to buy into the myth that everything I do is determined just because it was in vogue a few centuries ago. It was some wild fantasy which never had any evidence to support it.

    There is only one theory that speaks to the physical world, and it is Quantum Physics, and it is probabilistic. I don't know what information you gathered, but it is nothing but stories. Determinism has zero evidentiary support.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    because the rest of the physical world is entirely deterministic — JustSomeGuy

    You choose to believe this then believe it until your life gets so boring and meaningless you decide to believe otherwise. It's your mind that is playing the Deterministic game, no other. However, just remember, there is not one scintilla of evidence that anything is determined. It is all just a fabricated story, not even supported by physics.
  • Time dilation
    They will leave for a 50 year trip (for example) and hundreds and hundreds of years could have past here on earth, because of the time dilation their clock will move slower than ours due to the speed at which they would be traveling. — David Solman

    Not necessarily. Because of Special Theory of Relativity's Receprocity one can say that Earth is accelerating away from the spaceship, so it is the clocks in the Earth that are slowing down.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    ↪BlueBanana
    Reliability has no meaning anymore. It's all an illusion - supposedly. We can jettison Descartes. It's all just something, whatever it is. Time to close up shop. Everything is only an illusion including our minds. So much for the search for truth.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    How does it affect the reliability of the perceptions if they are an illusion? — BlueBanana

    They become meaningless much to the chagrin of Darwin. It harkens back to the days of old where all of the universe were mere puppets of the gods (bouncing particles). Compatibilism was a desperate attempt to bring some meaning back into life.

    But heck, if people want to feel that they are just illusions created by bouncing particles, no skin off my teeth.
  • Time cannot be created/emergent
    Don't we exist when we are asleep and don't feel time? — bahman

    I can be only speak for my own experiences. When I am dreaming I have no sense of duration, at least in the sense that I ordinarily feel duration when I am awake. There is a definite qualitative difference. The dream is just happening. However, when I am not dreaming.... ? Well this is not a state I can speak to because nothing is happening. I am not even sure such a state exists.

    So, I go to sleep, some dreams occur, and I wake up. What happens while I am not awake? It's quite different but without the feeling of duration impossible to describe. Just images occurring.

    Hamlet compared sleep to death in his soliloquy.
  • Consequentialism vs Taoism
    But if consciousness is simply a product of the physical brain, there is no separation--our consciousness is part of "the external world" just like everything else, and so we have no free will. This is something I've been struggling with ever since I started studying Taoism a few years back. — JustSomeGuy

    No need to struggle. Consciousness is not a byproduct of the brain, and you do have Choice. Since you have a choice, just drop the notion. In so doing you will notice you do have Choice (you are not determined to believe you are determined) and you can happily continue your studies in Daoism free of this notion.
  • Compatibilism is impossible
    People do still have experiences of the reality outside them, and as long as those experiences do not deny the possibility of one's experience of self, those experiences can be trusted to represent the reality, even if they are an illusion. — BlueBanana

    The bouncing particles are supposedly creating the illusion of mind. Of course, one has to question the illusion being created by the particles since it is all an illusion. What is reality then? That is what the Hindus have been trying to figure out. Mediation is one approach. Does Dennett meditate?

    That which is an Illusion (Mind) cannot be depended on to provide Reality.
Home » Rich