[ExI] [Extropolis] Thoughts on the manifesto of futurist science (1916).

[Giulio Prisco]

John:

< If it turns out that we really can send information faster than light
then we'd have to dump both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into
the trash…>

All depends on what you mean exactly by “send information.” Space itself
can stretch faster than light in GR, naked singularities and closed
timelike loop solutions exist in GR, and QM has entangled correlations.

< the directions are that you and I independently and arbitrarily decided
to call "up"…>

The subtle point here is what “independently and arbitrarily” means exactly.

< Obviously an agent is not uniquely determined by the external environment
but is also determined by the previous state the agent was in…>

According to conventional Laplacian determinism, both the external
environment and the previous state of the agent are determined by the state
of the universe long ago, long before the agent existed. Not so in global
determinism, where past and future are codetermined in a timeless loop. The
agent is an integral and irreducible part of the loop, and this is free
will.

Sorry for the very short reply, lots of things to to this morning at the
same time, I wish I could do them all in a timeless loop, more soon.

On 2023. Jun 8., Thu at 14:21, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 1:03 PM Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Giulio
>
> > > "psi has been tested over and over again, and it keeps on failing.
>>> And it's not surprising it failed given that because Bell's Inequality is
>>> violated we know that nonlocality is real but we also know that phenomenon
>>> cannot be used to transmit information, so it can't be involved in
>>> telepathy or signaling by way of psychokinesis."
>>
>>
>
> *> I think you forgot to add something like “as far as we presently know.*
>
>
> If it turns out that we really can send information faster than light then
> we'd have to dump both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into the
> trash, but before we do anything that drastic I'd want to see something a
> *LOT* more convincing than a third rate stage magician like Yuri Geller
> bending a spoon.
>
>
> > "*Also, yes, correlation doesn’t imply causation, but this cuts both
>> ways. Even if there’s nothing involved that we would call causation, the
>> correlation is still there. A particle doesn’t “tell” its spin to its
>> entangled pair (again, as far as we presently know), but the spin of its
>> entangled pair is (anti)correlated anyway. If you and I consistently happen
>> to think the same thing, isn’t this telepathy*?"
>
>
> But if you're talking about particles, spin, and Stern Gerlach magnets
> then it could be a perfect correlation, or a perfect anticorrelation, or
> anything inbetween depending on how different the directions are that you
> and I independently and arbitrarily decided to call "up". If the difference
> between what you choose to randomly call "up" and what I choose to randomly
> call  "up" is ø then the probability there will be a perfect
> anti-correlation is [COS(ø)]^2.  So you won't know if I'm thinking what
> you're thinking, or I'm thinking the exact opposite of what you're
> thinking, or something inbetween.
>
> > *I define the free will of an agent as the ability to do things that
>> are not entirely and uniquely determined by the rest of the universe (that
>> is, the universe minus the agent).*
>>
>
> Obviously an agent is not uniquely determined by the external environment
> but is also determined by the previous state the agent was in, that's one
> reason two people don't behave the same way when confronted with identical
> conditions.  Another possibility is that he behaved the way did because he
> was determined by absolutely nothing, not logic, not emotion, nothing. He
> did it for no reason, he behaved *UN*reasonably.  And the very definition
> of "random" is an action without a cause. In other words you did what you
> did because of your heredity, or because of your environment, or because of
> both, or because of neither and you did it for no reason at all and was
> just an act of pure randomness.
>
> So where does this thing called "free will" enter into this?  I think it's
> just a case of you don't know what you're going to do until you actually do
> it, and when you do it you say to yourself I guess I decided to do it of
> my own free will, but it's no more mysterious than the fact that a computer
> doesn't know what the answer to the calculation it is working on is until
> it has finished the computation.
>
> John K Clark
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "extropolis" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to extropolis+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/extropolis/CAJPayv0ow8RWmBjoVgTscJxiAxoVAgqLNfDgqhDcf26z4kRw4w%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/extropolis/CAJPayv0ow8RWmBjoVgTscJxiAxoVAgqLNfDgqhDcf26z4kRw4w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230609/1caaaf42/attachment.htm>