The Outside: The Philosophical Hyjack Thread

[NaffNaffBobFace]

I like getting into a deep convo about stuff and really exploring a topic and the underlying state of things as much as the next TESTie, but ofentimes it can really derail and really get in the way of an original thread especially if that thread was made by someone else...

So here it is: A safe space in Off Topic for anyone so tempted to philosophise away!

If you see a hyjack which is getting really deep, invite the participants to "take it outside" and continue their thread here.

Fill your boots!

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

When starting a chain in this thread, please post the originating thread for context, so for example (not a specific format do it your own way if you wish) :



Thread Hyjack from this thread, hyjack about Competitions and how they can go wrong:

The Ultimate Poll

When a poll is made, invariably there is a forum member unable to vote in it as their opinion is not represented. Fear not brave souls, for you now have this: The Forums Ultimate Poll! When someone cannot vote in your threads poll, link this and all shall be well! And what could be better...

testsquadron.com

Continued:
(@ my conversation companion from the other thread) conversation continued picking up where the last thread left off, desire for glory, driving forces for certain individuals etc.

 

[Bambooza]

Wait are you attempting to break with tradition and add structure to our posting ways?

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Wait are you attempting to break with tradition and add structure to our posting ways?

Naa, it's like when you're chatting in a bar with your buddies and two of them start talking about perception and if what they see as 'blue' is what you see as blue, and at that point you have what can only be subjective philosophical opinion which isn't going to go anywhere because in philosophy abject truth denies the nature of cognitive curiosity and those questions have no actual answers especially for drunks.

When your talking about something with no actual answer, your soon arguing about something with no actual answer and I can indulge that but when the disrespect comes out is where I have to draw the line.

It's a death spiral of opinion on opinion on opinion with no bones in the discussion to hang any flesh on, so frustration can ramp up with one or both sides with disrespect than usual destination... I mean look at this post i've written right here, imagine this post in the middle of a thread about Big Bennys Noodles - it's either abandon conversation as it's suddenly dry as hell and heading for Godwins Law or invite those interested in this unrelated aspect to take it outside to this thread to duke it out in the parking lot, then can come back to the table and continue to talk about what's going on with our favourite snack food manufacturers or whatever the actual thread is about.

Take it outside and come back with a clear head. It's worth a try, nothing else seems to have worked arthritis point

 

[Bambooza]

take it outside to this thread to duke it out in the parking lot, then can come back to the table

I do have to wonder if physical violence is missing from more discussions and would help ratify quicker resolutions.

Take it outside and come back with a clear head. It's worth a try, nothing else seems to have worked arthritis point

Where?

arthritis point

I'll meet you there

After all the blue you see and the blue I see is the same light wave length due to our shared experience.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

I'll meet you there

Every day is a loosing battle with Autocorrect but the alternative is just so much worse.

After all the blue you see and the blue I see is the same light wave length due to our shared experience.

It may be the same wavelength blue you both see but consider this - the yellow on TestSquardon.com on the screen you are looking at right now isn't the same wavelength as you'd see if it was printed out or a physical object lit by reflected light from the sun in front of you. And apparently purple Red+Blue with no green is an interpretation of the mind to that stimuli based on what's closest to that wavelength, it isn't actually a result of the wavelength your eyes pick up as there is no purple colour on the spectrum which doesn't contain any green - so what you see when you see an artificial Red+Blue is your minds closest guess.

Or something.

More here from people who actually get what they're talking about:

Colors from a computer vs. colors from visible spectrum of sunlight

Observation: So, I know that all computer screens are able to project many different colors by varying how they display the RGB (Red, Green, Blue) pixels. Question What's the difference between ...

physics.stackexchange.com

There is no evidence your minds interpretation of "blue" is what mine is. I've been bought up to recognize it as a cool calming colour but my blue might be your Lime Green.

 

[Bambooza]

Them be fighten words.

Add in the ability to shift colors by traveling fast enough and it does create more absurdity.
As for the color blue the key point was the share experience. Being we are both in the same location at the same time looking at the same color. Otherwise as you clearly stated to many factors distort the experience. Gray is one of those fun colors that perfectly illustrates this. On a clear sunny day you could easily mistake it for blue and in fact most blue eyes are in fact gray.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Them be fighten words.

Add in the ability to shift colors by traveling fast enough and it does create more absurdity.
As for the color blue the key point was the share experience. Being we are both in the same location at the same time looking at the same color. Otherwise as you clearly stated to many factors distort the experience. Gray is one of those fun colors that perfectly illustrates this. On a clear sunny day you could easily mistake it for blue and in fact most blue eyes are in fact gray.

Once upon a time in the past I had quite some experience in Photography and did find the 18% grey cards we used for colour balance most pleasant and yes absolutely it really would pick out the yellows of an autumn afternoon sun or the brilliant plain white of an overcast (not grey) day.

I can see we are definitely in agreement but I fear you are focusing on physical changes to the colour which both observers would see if they both observed the world the same way - but do they? Other physicalities could also effect this biologically too - look inside the eye and see the cones getting weary as they do their work sucking in those wavelengths and becoming inprinted. Look at a negative image of something then look at a white item and see the true colours, the famous example being looking at this flag at the dot for a minute and then looking at a blank white piece of paper:

But what I'm taking about is the minds interpretation of what is being passed to it by those cones and rods in the eye - as a dyslexic person I have a very strange affliction in my right eye which is not present in my left eye and I'll explain it like this:

Have you ever searched for your Blind Spot? Close your right eye and hold up your right thumb at arms length. Put your left thumb next to it and move it away, still looking at your right thumb - the left thumb should vanish at about 6 inches from the right one. Your mind fills in this Blind Spot gap.

In my right eye I get that missing/ming-filling-in effect you see when your thumb vanishes into the blind spot all over my field of vision and it dances around and screws up my ability to read with my right eye. I can still see but letters in words in my right eye just dissapear in black-on-white text being replaced by patches of what I'm guessing my brain would put there if the word was hiding in my blind spot... so I call it my "Overactive blind spot".

The blind-spot is the mind making stuff up where there no input exists for it to extrapolate from. Is that which lurks in your blind spot every single moment of your waking, seeing day anything but an assumption? And is the blue you see in that space... the same colour someone else sees...? :-)

 

[NomadicHavoc]

Very interesting how plastic the brain is.

 

[Yex]

Ambitious.

Philosophy is a causality of poor precision.
It's the precursor of modern Physics.

So the solution to philosophical debate is, "show me the math".

If you want a problem that's been rattling around my head to chew on, that currently lacks the math to leave philosophy;

Time travel is possible both ways, and via 4 paths.
There's the future & past.
Then there's the observed & production of each.

The observation of the future is X.
The production of the future is Einsteins special relativity.

The observation of the past is via the no-hiding theorem (conservation of information).
The production of the past is Y.

Like simple algebra if you have 3 variables you can determine the 4th. Using a system of linear equations we could answer both X & Y.

What I don't know, is how to mathematically factor in an observers perspective via the observer effect. I have considered that as its key on both past & present that the two may cancel each other out.

Anyone is welcome to chime in.

Edit;
If this problem also gets stuck in your head and bothers you. You're welcome.

Future Observation Past Production
------------------------------- = ---------------------------
Past Observation Future Production

 

[Bambooza]

Ambitious.

Philosophy is a causality of poor precision.
It's the precursor of modern Physics.

So the solution to philosophical debate is, "show me the math".

If you want a problem that's been rattling around my head to chew on, that currently lacks the math to leave philosophy;

Time travel is possible both ways, and via 4 paths.
There's the future & past.
Then there's the observed & production of each.

The observation of the future is X.
The production of the future is Einsteins special relativity.

The observation of the past is via the no-hiding theorem (conservation of information).
The production of the past is Y.

Like simple algebra if you have 3 variables you can determine the 4th. Using a system of linear equations we could answer both X & Y.

What I don't know, is how to mathematically factor in an observers perspective via the observer effect. I have considered that as its key on both past & present that the two may cancel each other out.

Anyone is welcome to chime in.

Edit;
If this problem also gets stuck in your head and bothers you. You're welcome.

Future Observation Past Production
------------------------------- = ---------------------------
Past Observation Future Production

It's still linear the very point at which you go back in time spawns a new branching timeline for the traveler who's future is as unknown as any other future. That only when you know the position of everything in the universe will you know the future. As for time travel going back the new branched timeline might start out familiar but as the traveler interacts it will start its divergent path.

 

[Talonsbane]

So this 1 time, at TEST camp, ... wait, what was I talking about? Sorry, I got distracted by thinking that 1 of us was requesting another drink. Silly me, I missed who it was anyways. Cheers!

 

[Yex]

It's still linear the very point at which you go back in time spawns a new branching timeline for the traveler who's future is as unknown as any other future. That only when you know the position of everything in the universe will you know the future. As for time travel going back the new branched timeline might start out familiar but as the traveler interacts it will start its divergent path.

You're going to have to pseudo math it for me

 

[Ayeteeone]

The production of the future is Einsteins special relativity.

Einstein's special relativity is not directional. The math, as you ask for, describes a relationship that can be calculated in either direction of our 'perception' of time. It is also, sadly, incomplete.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

It's still linear the very point at which you go back in time spawns a new branching timeline for the traveler who's future is as unknown as any other future. That only when you know the position of everything in the universe will you know the future. As for time travel going back the new branched timeline might start out familiar but as the traveler interacts it will start its divergent path.

You're going to have to pseudo math it for me

if it's a new timeline wouldn't that just change Future X to being Future C or wherever other letter as it would be separate and independent from Future X?

 

[Talonsbane]

if it's a new timeline wouldn't that just change Future X to being Future C or wherever other letter as it would be separate and independent from Future X?

Wouldn't the possibility of alternate timelines potentially allow for us TESTies to both enjoy our drinks while also still having them ready to be consumed? LoL I'd say that's rather TESTified.

 

[Yex]

It is also, sadly, incomplete.

If it were complete, what would I need you guys for. I'd retire on the island of Switzerland in the year 2890

if it's a new timeline wouldn't that just change Future X to being Future C or wherever other letter as it would be separate and independent from Future X?

I'm not really prescribed to the parallel timelines concept, the self-consistency conjecture which spawned it and many worlds interpretation just seem to be really grasping. While it's equal conjecture, they both seem too 'sci-fi' - just like black holes being infinitely dense (disproven via hawking radiation). Life has taught me consistent stable answers are straight forward.

What I'm suggesting is past & future exist on the same plane as eachother and cause the present. Its just perception of both that equal now.

The basic example of observing the past would be light from distant galaxies/stars. That information is the star billions of years ago, you're looking at the past. It's that well known concept that physicists kind of adore to rewind to, and which sparks these conversations. If you shift your perspective as the observer right now to be sitting in Andromeda looking at earth in the milky way through a giant 'magic' telescope, you would see the billion year old earths light, and effectively be looking at our little blue marble a billion years ago. That's the conservation of information at play. Change the distance and you change the time observed on earth. So let's not go so far away, 10 Light years, zoom into Montoyas house and we can see TEST being formed. Or what you were doing 10years ago.
So really the information for the past exists, it's just really far away.
Data existing but being unaccessible is much less of a problem than you'd think. At least I think you think I think.

That's where quantum entanglement becomes a subject to provide the production of the past. If that photon was entangled, and its pair happened to be 'trapped' on earth - we would have effectively a quantum data recording.
Superficially entangle the sequence, and maintain order somehow, even for 5minutes. Those particles/waves wouldnt just represent 5minutes ago, they would from our perspective/perception, be 5minutes ago.

It's aligns with special relativities concept of time being relative to the observers frame of reference.
I guess we could explore the other 3 points, they all have equal answers I suspect. Much like as it was mentioned, 'if you know everything you can know the future'. Maybe an answer a little less complicated than the ultimate equation to life.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

If it were complete, what would I need you guys for. I'd retire on the island of Switzerland in the year 2890

A fine year!

Wouldn't the possibility of alternate timelines potentially allow for us TESTies to both enjoy our drinks while also still having them ready to be consumed? LoL I'd say that's rather TESTified.

An infinite number of timelines... But only some of those will have the invention of drink in the first place, so possibly finite... So the question is can a TESTie own and consume all the drink, everywhere, all at once...?

 

[Yex]

If it were complete, what would I need you guys for. I'd retire on the island of Switzerland in the year 2890



I'm not really prescribed to the parallel timelines concept, the self-consistency conjecture which spawned it and many worlds interpretation just seem to be really grasping. While it's equal conjecture, they both seem too 'sci-fi' - just black holes being infinitely dense (disproven via hawking radiation).

What I'm suggesting is past & future exist on the same plane as eachother and cause the present. Its just perception of both that equal now.

The basic example of observing the past would be light from distant galaxies/stars. That information is the star billions of years ago. If you shift your perspective as the observer right now to be sitting in Andromeda looking at earth in the milky way through a giant 'magic' telescope, you would see the billion year old earths light, and effectively be looking at out little blue marble a billion years ago. That's the conservation of information at play. Change the distance and you change the time observed on earth.
So really the information for the past exists, it's just really far away.
Data existing but being unaccessible is much less of a problem I theoretically think.

That's where quantum entanglement becomes a subject to provide the production of the past. If that photon was entangled, and its pair happened to be 'trapped' on earth - we would have effectively a quantum data recording.
Superficially entangle the sequence, and maintain order somehow, even for 5minutes. Those particles/waves wouldnt just represent 5minutes ago, they would from our perspective/perception, be 5minutes ago.

It's aligns with special relativities concept of time being relative to the observers frame of reference.

@NaffNaffBobFace will @ you I do not think an edit reply will prompt you. Sorry it took a moment, was cooking the family dinner!

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

If it were complete, what would I need you guys for. I'd retire on the island of Switzerland in the year 2890



I'm not really prescribed to the parallel timelines concept, the self-consistency conjecture which spawned it and many worlds interpretation just seem to be really grasping. While it's equal conjecture, they both seem too 'sci-fi' - just like black holes being infinitely dense (disproven via hawking radiation). Life has taught me consistent stable answers are straight forward.

What I'm suggesting is past & future exist on the same plane as eachother and cause the present. Its just perception of both that equal now.

The basic example of observing the past would be light from distant galaxies/stars. That information is the star billions of years ago, you're looking at the past. It's that well known concept that physicists kind of adore to rewind to, and which sparks these conversations. If you shift your perspective as the observer right now to be sitting in Andromeda looking at earth in the milky way through a giant 'magic' telescope, you would see the billion year old earths light, and effectively be looking at our little blue marble a billion years ago. That's the conservation of information at play. Change the distance and you change the time observed on earth. So let's not go so far away, 10 Light years, zoom into Montoyas house and we can see TEST being formed. Or what you were doing 10years ago.
So really the information for the past exists, it's just really far away.
Data existing but being unaccessible is much less of a problem than you'd think. At least I think you think I think.

That's where quantum entanglement becomes a subject to provide the production of the past. If that photon was entangled, and its pair happened to be 'trapped' on earth - we would have effectively a quantum data recording.
Superficially entangle the sequence, and maintain order somehow, even for 5minutes. Those particles/waves wouldnt just represent 5minutes ago, they would from our perspective/perception, be 5minutes ago.

It's aligns with special relativities concept of time being relative to the observers frame of reference.
I guess we could explore the other 3 points, they all have equal answers I suspect. Much like as it was mentioned, 'if you know everything you can know the future'. Maybe an answer a little less complicated than the ultimate equation to life.

Hmm, interesting - At some point in the future someone will know the answer to this and like Donnie Darko become a multi-dimentional being able to see the progression of time not from within it, but from outside of it and pick and choose which point of it to drop in on at will.

At this point the question is why have they (or a culture or the entire species if they have evolved it) have not popped back and let us know where we are going and what's going to happen? This is where multi-timelines/dimensions can come in to play in that who is to say they haven't and we're just plodding the original timeline where they discover the secret the first time before it is eventually discovered.

The future knowledge holders choose to go back to the 1970's and deliver the secret to Fusion power to the Luxembourgers and by now they are the worlds mightiest superpowers... well, there has to be some time, an original time, that didn't happen or it's a Paradox where without the original crap version of history there would be no ultimate discovery of The Knowledge to be able to time-travel in the first place.

Perhaps there are no alternate timelines and the Paradox is real - every time they try to alter the past the course of history denies the future Knowledge occurrence and we remain stubbornly on this timeline... meaning time travel even if possible... isn't actually possible because travelling back in time and having any effect on history at all would invalidate the circumstances of that future happening at all... but then that would also be true for travelling forward in time and then returning to your own time with knowledge gained from the future. Knowing what's coming would present the opportunity to alter it without knowing. That wouldn't invalidate time-travel once invented but would invalidate whatever events you might try to alter on your return, as without that event happening, you would not then be able to witness it on your trip to the future to then change it... So any attempt to time travel would look like failure as no one would ever be able to travel through time and return with any information...

So time travel... I think it would be Forwards Only and it'd be a one-way trip. I read a collected story book called Across Realtime by Vernor Vinge whos concept was entirely around the thought of one-way time travel, going forward in things called Bobbles, impenetrable force field like things which stopped all things from entering them - even time - but would blip out of existence after an amount of time leaving whatever was in them in a new era entirely. A really cool read.