Pardon my interjection, but could you guys briefly outline the properties of wave motion? How does the velocity or oscillation of an electron in an atom vary from one traveling in a beam or current, and how does this compare to electromagnetic radiation in various contexts? — Enrique
Yeah, except they wouldn't have the properties for us to use the word qualia. We're conscious, just not in the way it seems, I guess. That does raise the question of what it means to be conscious. — Marchesk
There are recognizable qualitative characters of the given, which may be repeated in different experiences, and are thus a sort of universals; I call these "qualia." But although such qualia are universals, in the sense of being recognized from one to another experience, they must be distinguished from the properties of objects. Confusion of these two is characteristic of many historical conceptions, as well as of current essence-theories. The quale is directly intuited, given, and is not the subject of any possible error because it is purely subjective. — Clarence Irving Lewis
So if the holes (at the screen and elsewhere downstream) don't participate in the conspiracy (indeed, such an extended conspiracy would seem problematic), and there aren't many holes available at any one time, then the emitter has to time its transactions so as to build up the right pattern over time. — SophistiCat
Is it plausible? I suppose the bare-bones theory (not including a specific mechanism for the Born rule) does not rule it out, and neither does its empirical basis, which consists of just such accumulation over time of apparently probabilistic events. — SophistiCat
What I'm suggesting is you'e under an illusion about the nature of the internal world. About what's involved in your having that experience.
— Keith Frankish
...
So what accounts for the illusion that conscious experience has properties of qualia? — Marchesk
Correlations drawn between color and other things are not so much caused by color so much as they are made possible by color. Color is one basic elemental constituent of all conscious experience of color... that of red/redness notwithstanding. — creativesoul
You're saying that people who are open to panpsychism are "uncomfortable" with the facts. I think this is in line with csalisbury's view that the characters on the stage include:
1. A strong, intrepid physicalist, courageously facing the wilderness of truth, simultaneously defeating both panpsychism and nihilism.
2. A weak, muddleheaded boy, plaintively pushing magic on the world, in need of pummeling. — frank
Towards what exactly? — khaled
If an electron is ready to fire, and there is (in the edge case) just one hole that it can fill, then it will go there almost always, because where else would it go? — SophistiCat
(Unless holes and/or emission events conspire to construct the distribution that we expect to see.) — SophistiCat
Perhaps the emitter is picky and won't always transact with a hole just because it's available? — SophistiCat
Yes, but in order to explain experiments where we see nice diffraction patterns, we must conclude that the number of holes available at any given time is not too few, or else we would be seeing something different (or we need to modify the theory). — SophistiCat
Language less conscious experience of red/redness cannot consist of correlations drawn between the color red and language use. The color and food items for the trained crow is an adequate example. If the crow was trained to gather red items after hearing the name "red" being spoken aloud, then it would no longer be language less for the correlations would include the language use, along with the red items and the food items. Should the crow be brilliant enough to learn how to talk about it's own conscious experiences of red/redness , that would be a metacognitive crow. — creativesoul
All conscious experience consists of correlations drawn between the color red and other things. In that very real sense, they are all the same. — creativesoul
If you had a quantum theory of special relativity you'd get the Nobel in physics without having to wait for a vote of the committee. — fishfry
The equations are drawn from a book by physicist Lee Smolin, he knows what he's talking about lol — Enrique
the former. — Julz
So, is it possible there is a creator? I’m interested to hear and address counter arguments as I’m not hostile to alternative atheistic or agnostic perspectives. — Julz
Three of the fundamental equations of quantum physics are:
E=mc2,
w=P/mv,
and E=Pf,
where E=energy, m=mass, c=the velocity of light, w=wavelength, f=frequency, v=velocity, and P=Planck’s constant. — Enrique
Has science become so complete that it explicitly excludes the possibility of a creator? — Julz
What does all conscious experience of red consist in/of such that it is by virtue of having that constituency that makes it count as conscious experience of red. — creativesoul
If the hole moves around independently of the impacting wave, while emissions are a Markov process, i.e. a transaction is established whenever a hole is available (as you explain below), with no "knowledge" of what comes before or after, then the resulting distribution of impacts will be independent of the impacting wave. It will only depend on the entropic movement of the hole - most likely just a uniform distribution. — SophistiCat
While there are a growing number who think that the Brexiters should be given their holy grail (clean break Brexit) and be made to own it. As that is the only way to lance the boil. — Punshhh
So, is the dancing sun just another yet unknown natural phenomenon? Now of course we do have a prophecy so the question is does the church have records of such cycles? I believe they do.
There's also the whole timing of the thing. At that time, there was a great schism between Rome and Russia, between Roman Catholicism and Greek Orthodox. So, might there have been some agenda that Rome was pushing?
Miracles or politics? — 8livesleft
In The Evidence for Visions of the Virgin Mary Kevin McClure wrote that the crowd at Cova da Iria may have been expecting to see signs in the Sun, since similar phenomena had been reported in the weeks leading up to the miracle. On this basis, he believes that the crowd saw what it wanted to see. McClure also stated that he had never seen such a collection of contradictory accounts of a case in any of the research that he had done in the previous ten years. — Wikipedia
There is a section regarding the resurrection that states that 500 people "saw Jesus." That is indeed a good number. But again, what I would ask is, how do those people know who they were looking at? Might this be an issue of mistaken identity?
...
So how trustworthy is this source? — 8livesleft
On October 13th, about 70.000 - 100.000 people had assembled to observe what Portuguese newspapers had been ridiculing for months as the absurd claim of three shepherd children that a miracle was going to occur at high-noon in the Cova da Iria on October 13, 1917. According to many witness statements, after a downfall of rain, the dark clouds broke and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disk in the sky. It was said to be significantly less bright than normal, and cast multicolored lights across the landscape, the shadows on the landscape, the people, and the surrounding clouds. The sun was then reported to have moved towards the earth in a zigzag pattern, frightening some of those present who thought it meant the end of the world. Astronomers across the rest of the world did not observe any unusual activity of the sun.
We must recognize cause and effect for what it really is: a concept human beings use to describe the relative movement of objects in the environment, objects which are fundamentally neither caused nor effected but are rooted in the infinity of their own absolute and infinitely singular material essence, in whatever form it happens to be observed, and as a function of whatever relative context in which it happens to be observed. — Darkneos
Pretty much the whole process you describe is consistent with the approach I advocate, as I already said to Srap when he said similar things earlier. It’s the weeding out of alternatives (even if we haven’t enumerated them yet) that progresses our knowledge, and multiple models that equally well survive that process are not elevated by the process but are merely equal co-survivors of it. — Pfhorrest
So association of color equals conception of color? — creativesoul
What you have described is an animal that can not only compare two objects of the same colour, but can compare that colour to a colour is associates with 'get foodness'. This 'get foodness' may well be identically the "crow equivalent of the concept of redness" I spoke of (seems likely). — Kenosha Kid
I'm not saying that one need to have knowledge that color is determined - in part - by reflected/emitted light, I'm saying that one needs to be able to focus upon the fact that different things reflect/emit the same light(that things are the same color) in order to gather like colored things for the sake of doing so. — creativesoul
You're claiming that that gathering ability requires a concept of redness. I'm saying that it only requires the ability to see and gather like colored things and hold some expectation of food upon doing so, and that seeing and gathering red things does not equate to having a conception of redness. — creativesoul
This likely origin and function of the idea of morality strongly suggests it to be self-serving and relativistic. It is relativistic in the sense that morality is not tied to anything deeper that what is likely in the interest of a strong society at that moment. — Restitutor
For me the idea of absolute morality that extends beyond what is self-serving is as unlikely as there being a white bearded god out there. — Restitutor
Why do those observations not equally lend support to the other theories that are just as consistent with them? — Pfhorrest
Like I’ve been saying to Janus over and over, that’s beside the point. Sure, if you can show that not-P implies not-Q, and that Q, then you can show that P, via falsifying not-P. But that’s not what falsification was ever against. — Pfhorrest
Not to derail the discussion, but I think what you're discussing here is Sellars' distinction between "pattern governed behavior" and "rule obeying behavior"; see "Some Reflections on Language Games". Roughly, the former is a matter of conditioning, standard learning processes, etc., while the latter relies on a meta-level recognition of something having the status of a rule that authorizes inference. — Srap Tasmaner
Indeed, and this shows us that "redness" is neither necessary nor useful aside from creating a bottle to buzz around in... — creativesoul
I would say instead that there are many degrees between a completely falsified belief and a mostly-unfalsified one. — Pfhorrest
Where's the concept of "redness" in all of that? It's nowhere to be found because it's not necessary in order to do all of those things. — creativesoul
The concept of "redness" emerges from careful and very deliberate consideration of previous normal everyday use of "red". — creativesoul
I agree that some language less creatures can perceive the frequencies of light that we've named "red", — creativesoul
The irony of pots and kettles... — creativesoul
I do not think that you understood the argument given. Merely distinguishing between red and blue is inadequate for understanding and/or immediately apprehending redness as a property of conscious experience. — creativesoul
Knowing that red things have that in common requires isolating and focusing upon the fact that the same frequencies are emitted/reflected by different things. — creativesoul
(Nor, if you yourself feel inclined to accept it, demand proof from yourself or else reject it; if it seems true to you, go ahead and believe it). — Pfhorrest
The inability to ever have evidence for something, rather than merely against the alternatives, is the whole point of falsificationism. — Pfhorrest
This is contrary to the idea that X ought to be tentatively accepted until falsified
— Kenosha Kid
I never said it ought to be, only that it may be. — Pfhorrest
all beliefs should be considered justified enough by default to be tentatively held (the liberal part) until reasons can be found to reject them (the critcal part) — Pfhorrest
Pending evidence either way, both X and ~X are permissible beliefs. To say that pending evidence either way, both X and ~X are impermissible beliefs (what I mean by "cynicism") would make it impossible to ever have evidence either way (because you would need some beliefs to be the evidence, but you couldn't hold those without others that you also aren't permitted to hold yet, ad infinitum), and so impossible for any belief in anything to ever be permissible. — Pfhorrest
Is it okay to believe in those things you think are uncontroversial without first proving that they're correct from the ground up? — Pfhorrest
Immediately apprehending and/or understanding the property of redness requires already knowing how to use "red", and is metacognitive in it's constitution. Already knowing how to use the term "red" to talk about red things is thought and belief that is linguistic in it's constitution but not metacognitive. So, it is either the case that raw, basic, fundamental, private, ineffable immediately apprehensible conscious experience involving red cups, balls, and tulips does not include the property of redness, or raw, basic, fundamental, private, ineffable conscious experience requires metacognition. Not all conscious experience involving red cups, balls, and tulips requires language. All metacognition does. So, the property of redness is disqualified(pun intended). — creativesoul
Can you really though? I mean, pragmatically speaking, in an ordinary sense, sure you can: you can look at Jon and see his hair is blonde. But in a technical sense, in the way Banno and Isaac are on about, it's always possible to instead revise a bunch of other beliefs to account for why it seems to you like Jon has blonde hair but somehow he really doesn't. — Pfhorrest
the other, which I call "cynicism" (whereby it is necessary to reject any belief until reason is shown to accept it), is what I'm arguing against, and which you seem to be arguing for here. — Pfhorrest
For any reason put forth in support of some opinion is itself another opinion, for which the justificationist must then, if consistent with this principle, demand yet another reason. But that in turn will be some other opinion, for which the same demand for justification must be made. And so forth ad infinitum. — Pfhorrest
The cancellation depends on both waves being advanced waves, so it's not purely terminological. (Advanced waves cannot cancel retarded waves in Cramer's formulation.)
— Kenosha Kid
Why not? — SophistiCat
But even if an absorber is available, the cumulative distribution of impacts will be defined only by the distribution of the available absorbers on the screen over time. — SophistiCat
And at the same time, in order for the Born rule to hold, that distribution has to match the impacting wavefunction - whatever it happens to be. If we can contrive to emit a particle that hits the screen at times (t1, t2, ...), the screen had better supply us absorbers at such locations ri that (r1, r2, ...) form the distribution that we expect to see. — SophistiCat
does not quite hold: we cannot make emissions happen at will (can we?) — SophistiCat
We do, of course, observe that the cumulative distribution of impacts on the back screen is in line with the square of the wavefunction from the emitter. If emission occurs whenever, while the distribution of available absorbers on the screen is constrained by external factors, then we won't recover the expected distribution. — SophistiCat
But other than terminology, do you see any issues with his proposal? — SophistiCat
Instead of that, they should interact with the ordinary dense matter, at least 380,000 years old, as shown in Figure 2 from my recent paper on the problem of the direction of the electromagnetic arrow of time: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/13505 — Darko B
Or do you think that all Biden voters believe that Trump is the new Hitler? — ssu