subject:"Re\: Civilization\-level quantum suicide"

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2017-02-28 Thread Mark Buda

Mark Buda  writes:

> Still busy, but things are looking up for finding the time. I'll have
> to revisit what I wrote before, though, because some of it was
> garbage. Nailed the red state blue state thing, though, even though I
> didn't explain adequately.

While I did nail it, I never actually said in the first place. I
misremembered that. Or I said it somewhere else, or just thought I did.

> I always had a problem with showing my work.

Yeah.

> On Monday, July 19, 2010 at 9:16:24 AM UTC-4, Mark Buda wrote:
>
> I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, Jesse;
> unfortunately, I don't have the time at the moment to respond
> adequately.
> 
> I think it would greatly improve the signal-to-noise ratio on this
> list if everybody else kept quiet on this thread until you read my
> response to Jesse. Please be patient, I have a lot of stuff to do
> today.
> 
> Waiting is. :-)
> 
> -- 
> Mark Buda 
> I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.
> 
> 
>
> 
> --
> On Jul 19, 2010 9:04 AM, Jesse Mazer 
> wrote: 
>
> How long ago did you see them? [...]
> As for the psychiatrist and therapist, did you also try to explain
> these sorts of grand ideas to them? How did they react?

Sort of irrelevant at this point.

> Mark, these kinds of sentences and paragraphs are completely
> solipsistic. Even if you have some sort of valid insight, you
> simply haven't provided enough context and intermediate steps of
> your reasoning to make it possible another person could
> *understand* why you think, for example, that "our sense of humor
> and our mathematical intuition and our genes form an impossible
> triangular loop". You're just making a lot of grand pronouncements
> whose only purpose seems to be to express how excited you are
> about your own brainstorms rather than to communicate with other
> human beings. This is, I think, one of the big reasons myself and
> others get the sense of a mental disorder from your
> posts--disorders like mania and schizophrenia are associated with
> losing the ability to (or no longer caring to) consider the the
> understanding of other people, to consider what background context
> will be shared enough that it doesn't need to be explained and
> what context is not shared and *does* need to be explained (for
> instance, on this list we can talk of 'quantum immortality'
> without explaining what it means, but with most people you'd have
> to launch into some background about the many-worlds
> interpretation before using the term), in order to communicate in
> a way that will make some sense to others.

Yes, well, exactly.

> Also, in a person with mania at least, I think this kind of
> partial mindblindness is related to being over-optimistic about
> the likelihood that others have understood/agreed with what you
> have said...in the case of the priest, you seem to have taken his
> lack of counterarguments as a sort of tacit agreement (or at least
> an acknowledgment that he found sense in your arguments), which
> may not be true at all. Did you ask him (or others you've talked
> to about your ideas) any questions to try to gauge their
> understanding of what you were saying? Along the lines of "do you
> follow" or "does this make sense to you"?

No, of course not. If I was not so self-absorbed that I bothered to ask
the question, I was certainly so self-absorbed that I ignored the
answer.

> > Back to the point. We don't have instincts to tell us how to
> care for our
> > young. We rely on culture for that. And culture is still really,
> really
> > young. The memes are just getting started! That's it! Richard
> Dawkins is
> > God, then, because he is the source of the idea of the meme.
> Whee! What a
> > marvelous yet annoying thing God hath made. Can't wait to see
> what's next.
> 
> Another example of the same solipsistic communication style here.
> *Why* does Richard Dawkin's invention of the concept of the meme
> make him "God"? It's a huge leap of logic and once again you seem
> to be too excited by your insight to bother with filling in any of
> the intermediate reasoning that might make this paragraph
> meaningful to anyone but yourself (and it doesn't really seem like
> you were thinking of the problem of whether others would
> understand when you wrote it).

Yeah.

Anyway, sorry about the delay. Some things had to be worked out. I'm
hoping to get started on explaining it soon. It really doesn't matter,
since, if I'm right, you're going to figure it out anyway. Those of you
who aren't philosophical zombies, anyway. You know who you are.
-- 
Mark Buda

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2017-02-28 Thread Mark Buda

Still busy, but things are looking up for finding the time. I'll have to 
revisit what I wrote before, though, because some of it was garbage. Nailed 
the red state blue state thing, though, even though I didn't explain 
adequately.

I always had a problem with showing my work.

On Monday, July 19, 2010 at 9:16:24 AM UTC-4, Mark Buda wrote:
>
> I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, Jesse; unfortunately, 
> I don't have the time at the moment to respond adequately.
>
> I think it would greatly improve the signal-to-noise ratio on this list if 
> everybody else kept quiet on this thread until you read my response to 
> Jesse. Please be patient, I have a lot of stuff to do today.
>
> Waiting is. :-)
> -- 
> Mark Buda 
> I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.
>
>
> --
> On Jul 19, 2010 9:04 AM, Jesse Mazer  wrote: 
>
>
> > > Please, seek medical help. If you're right, you lose nothing and might
> > > convince at least the psychiatrist you talk to. If I'm right, you get
> > > cured. It can't do you any harm, but leaving what looks to me like a
> > > serious illness untreated may well do you some serious harm.
> > 
> > Look, I've already seen a psychiatrist and a priest and a therapist and
> > they don't see a problem here. 
>
> How long ago did you see them? Is it possible things have developed 
> somewhat since them? You did mention that you told the priest that you're 
> God. But what exactly does "don't see a problem" mean? Presumably the 
> priest didn't actually agree that you are God (unless he was a mystically 
> inclined priest who thought you were just saying that all of us are God), 
> so do you just mean that the priest didn't try to argue you were wrong? 
> Sometimes when people encounter someone with a mental problem their 
> instinct may be to try to show empathy and to guide the conversation in a 
> more human (less cosmic/grandiose) direction rather than trying to 
> dismantle their ideas through argument...
>
> As for the psychiatrist and therapist, did you also try to explain these 
> sorts of grand ideas to them? How did they react?
>
> > 
> > Every animal on this planet has evolved an instinctual means to care for
> > its young. Except us. We have no natural instinct. Or do we?
> > 
> > Holy crap. Richard Dawkins doesn't even understand the point of his own
> > books. Our sense of humor and our mathematical intuition and our genes
> > form an impossible triangular causal loop. Selfish gene, indeed.
>
> Mark, these kinds of sentences and paragraphs are completely solipsistic. 
> Even if you have some sort of valid insight, you simply haven't provided 
> enough context and intermediate steps of your reasoning to make it possible 
> another person could *understand* why you think, for example, that "our 
> sense of humor and our mathematical intuition and our genes form an 
> impossible triangular loop". You're just making a lot of grand 
> pronouncements whose only purpose seems to be to express how excited you 
> are about your own brainstorms rather than to communicate with other human 
> beings. This is, I think, one of the big reasons myself and others get the 
> sense of a mental disorder from your posts--disorders like mania and 
> schizophrenia are associated with losing the ability to (or no longer 
> caring to) consider the the understanding of other people, to consider what 
> background context will be shared enough that it doesn't need to be 
> explained and what context is not shared and *does* need to be explained 
> (for instance, on this list we can talk of 'quantum immortality' without 
> explaining what it means, but with most people you'd have to launch into 
> some background about the many-worlds interpretation before using the 
> term), in order to communicate in a way that will make some sense to others.
>
> Also, in a person with mania at least, I think this kind of partial 
> mindblindness is related to being over-optimistic about the likelihood that 
> others have understood/agreed with what you have said...in the case of the 
> priest, you seem to have taken his lack of counterarguments as a sort of 
> tacit agreement (or at least an acknowledgment that he found sense in your 
> arguments), which may not be true at all. Did you ask him (or others you've 
> talked to about your ideas) any questions to try to gauge their 
> understanding of what you were saying? Along the lines of "do you follow" 
> or "does this make sense to you"?
>
> > 
> > Back to the point. We don't have instincts to tell us how to care for our
> > young. We rely on culture for that. And culture is still really, really
> > young. The memes are just getting started! That's it! Richard Dawkins is
> > God, then, because he is the source of the idea of the meme. Whee! What a
> > marvelous yet annoying thing God hath made. Can't wait to see what's 
> next.
>
> Another example of the same solipsistic

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-19 Thread Jesse Mazer



  Please, seek medical help. If you're right, you lose nothing and might
  convince at least the psychiatrist you talk to. If I'm right, you get
  cured. It can't do you any harm, but leaving what looks to me like a
  serious illness untreated may well do you some serious harm.
 
 Look, I've already seen a psychiatrist and a priest and a therapist and
 they don't see a problem here. 

How long ago did you see them? Is it possible things have developed somewhat 
since them? You did mention that you told the priest that you're God. But what 
exactly does don't see a problem mean? Presumably the priest didn't actually 
agree that you are God (unless he was a mystically inclined priest who thought 
you were just saying that all of us are God), so do you just mean that the 
priest didn't try to argue you were wrong? Sometimes when people encounter 
someone with a mental problem their instinct may be to try to show empathy and 
to guide the conversation in a more human (less cosmic/grandiose) direction 
rather than trying to dismantle their ideas through argument...

As for the psychiatrist and therapist, did you also try to explain these sorts 
of grand ideas to them? How did they react?

 
 Every animal on this planet has evolved an instinctual means to care for
 its young. Except us. We have no natural instinct. Or do we?
 
 Holy crap. Richard Dawkins doesn't even understand the point of his own
 books. Our sense of humor and our mathematical intuition and our genes
 form an impossible triangular causal loop. Selfish gene, indeed.

Mark, these kinds of sentences and paragraphs are completely solipsistic. Even 
if you have some sort of valid insight, you simply haven't provided enough 
context and intermediate steps of your reasoning to make it possible another 
person could *understand* why you think, for example, that our sense of humor 
and our mathematical intuition and our genes form an impossible triangular 
loop. You're just making a lot of grand pronouncements whose only purpose 
seems to be to express how excited you are about your own brainstorms rather 
than to communicate with other human beings. This is, I think, one of the big 
reasons myself and others get the sense of a mental disorder from your 
posts--disorders like mania and schizophrenia are associated with losing the 
ability to (or no longer caring to) consider the the understanding of other 
people, to consider what background context will be shared enough that it 
doesn't need to be explained and what context is not shared and *does* need to 
be explained (for instance, on this list we can talk of 'quantum immortality' 
without explaining what it means, but with most people you'd have to launch 
into some background about the many-worlds interpretation before using the 
term), in order to communicate in a way that will make some sense to others.

Also, in a person with mania at least, I think this kind of partial 
mindblindness is related to being over-optimistic about the likelihood that 
others have understood/agreed with what you have said...in the case of the 
priest, you seem to have taken his lack of counterarguments as a sort of tacit 
agreement (or at least an acknowledgment that he found sense in your 
arguments), which may not be true at all. Did you ask him (or others you've 
talked to about your ideas) any questions to try to gauge their understanding 
of what you were saying? Along the lines of do you follow or does this make 
sense to you?

 
 Back to the point. We don't have instincts to tell us how to care for our
 young. We rely on culture for that. And culture is still really, really
 young. The memes are just getting started! That's it! Richard Dawkins is
 God, then, because he is the source of the idea of the meme. Whee! What a
 marvelous yet annoying thing God hath made. Can't wait to see what's next.

Another example of the same solipsistic communication style here. *Why* does 
Richard Dawkin's invention of the concept of the meme make him God? It's a 
huge leap of logic and once again you seem to be too excited by your insight to 
bother with filling in any of the intermediate reasoning that might make this 
paragraph meaningful to anyone but yourself (and it doesn't really seem like 
you were thinking of the problem of whether others would understand when you 
wrote it).


  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-19 Thread Mark Buda

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, Jesse; unfortunately, I 
don't have the time at the moment to respond adequately.

I think it would greatly improve the signal-to-noise ratio on this list if 
everybody else kept quiet on this thread until you read my response to Jesse. 
Please be patient, I have a lot of stuff to do today.

Waiting is. :-)
--nbsp;
Mark Buda lt;her...@acm.orggt;
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.


On Jul 19, 2010 9:04 AM, Jesse Mazer lt;laserma...@hotmail.comgt; wrote: 



gt; gt; Please, seek medical help. If you're right, you lose nothing and might
gt; gt; convince at least the psychiatrist you talk to. If I'm right, you get
gt; gt; cured. It can't do you any harm, but leaving what looks to me like a
gt; gt; serious illness untreated may well do you some serious harm.
gt; 
gt; Look, I've already seen a psychiatrist and a priest and a therapist and
gt; they don't see a problem here. 

How long ago did you see them? Is it possible things have developed somewhat 
since them? You did mention that you told the priest that you're God. But what 
exactly does don't see a problem mean? Presumably the priest didn't actually 
agree that you are God (unless he was a mystically inclined priest who thought 
you were just saying that all of us are God), so do you just mean that the 
priest didn't try to argue you were wrong? Sometimes when people encounter 
someone with a mental problem their instinct may be to try to show empathy and 
to guide the conversation in a more human (less cosmic/grandiose) direction 
rather than trying to dismantle their ideas through argument...

As for the psychiatrist and therapist, did you also try to explain these sorts 
of grand ideas to them? How did they react?

gt; 
gt; Every animal on this planet has evolved an instinctual means to care for
gt; its young. Except us. We have no natural instinct. Or do we?
gt; 
gt; Holy crap. Richard Dawkins doesn't even understand the point of his own
gt; books. Our sense of humor and our mathematical intuition and our genes
gt; form an impossible triangular causal loop. Selfish gene, indeed.

Mark, these kinds of sentences and paragraphs are completely solipsistic. Even 
if you have some sort of valid insight, you simply haven't provided enough 
context and intermediate steps of your reasoning to make it possible another 
person could *understand* why you think, for example, that our sense of humor 
and our mathematical intuition and our genes form an impossible triangular 
loop. You're just making a lot of grand pronouncements whose only purpose 
seems to be to express how excited you are about your own brainstorms rather 
than to communicate with other human beings. This is, I think, one of the big 
reasons myself and others get the sense of a mental disorder from your 
posts--disorders like mania and schizophrenia are associated with losing the 
ability to (or no longer caring to) consider the the understanding of other 
people, to consider what background context will be shared enough that it 
doesn't need to be explained and what context is not shared and *does* need to 
be explained (for instance, on this list we can talk of 'quantum immortality' 
without explaining what it means, but with most people you'd have to launch 
into some background about the many-worlds interpretation before using the 
term), in order to communicate in a way that will make some sense to others.

Also, in a person with mania at least, I think this kind of partial 
mindblindness is related to being over-optimistic about the likelihood that 
others have understood/agreed with what you have said...in the case of the 
priest, you seem to have taken his lack of counterarguments as a sort of tacit 
agreement (or at least an acknowledgment that he found sense in your 
arguments), which may not be true at all. Did you ask him (or others you've 
talked to about your ideas) any questions to try to gauge their understanding 
of what you were saying? Along the lines of do you follow or does this make 
sense to you?

gt; 
gt; Back to the point. We don't have instincts to tell us how to care for our
gt; young. We rely on culture for that. And culture is still really, really
gt; young. The memes are just getting started! That's it! Richard Dawkins is
gt; God, then, because he is the source of the idea of the meme. Whee! What a
gt; marvelous yet annoying thing God hath made. Can't wait to see what's next.

Another example of the same solipsistic communication style here. *Why* does 
Richard Dawkin's invention of the concept of the meme make him God? It's a 
huge leap of logic and once again you seem to be too excited by your insight to 
bother with filling in any of the intermediate reasoning that might make this 
paragraph meaningful to anyone but yourself (and it doesn't really seem like 
you were thinking of the problem of whether others would understand when you 
wrote it).

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Jesse Mazer

Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 16:10:23 -0700
Subject: RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide
From: her...@acm.org
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com

I'm not kidding. I understand your concern. If you were to interact with
me in real time I'd probably seem fairly normal (assuming I wanted to seem
normal, of course).

But I'm fairly certain now that not only am I not experiencing a mental
disorder, but that many so-called mental disorders are in fact, um,
well, I'm not sure how to explain it yet. That's why I want people who
know about this stuff to talk to me. I can explain schizophrenia. I can
explain depression. I can explain visions, dreams, hallucinations, and all
of that stuff. I have figure out the relationship betweeen all the
disparate fields. I'm a jack of all trades, master of none.

Well, it's impossible to know what's going on with you based on a few email
messages but it definitely sounds like it could be a manic state to me--this
sort of grandiosity and boundless confidence in one's own abilities and powers
is common in mania. I definitely recommend checking out that Oliver Sacks
article about mania I linked to above as you might recognize aspects of
yourself in some of the descriptions (often self-descriptions from people in a
manic state themselves). And having interacted with a friend in a manic state I
would definitely say they can seem fairly normal if they choose to talk about
subjects other than the grandiose and cosmic.

Have you been feeling particularly energetic or happy or alive lately? Any
changes in your sensory experience, like colors and sounds seeming more vivid
and beautiful? Do your body movements feel more coordinated, graceful, fluid?

From Sacks' article, here's a short description of the onset of mania from a
manic-depressive psychiatrist:

I was a senior in high school when I had my first attack of
manic-depressive illness; once the siege began, I lost my mind rather
rapidly. At first, everything seemed so easy. I raced about like a
crazed weasel, bubbling with plans and enthusiasms, immersed in sports,
and staying up all night, night after night, out with friends, reading
everything that wasn’t nailed down, filling manuscript books with poems
and fragments of plays, and making expansive, completely unrealistic,
plans for my future. The world was filled with pleasure and promise; I
felt great. Not just great, I felt really great. I felt I could
do anything, that no task was too difficult. My mind seemed clear,
fabulously focused, and able to make intuitive mathematical leaps that
had up to that point entirely eluded me. Indeed, they elude me still.

At that time, however, not only did everything make perfect sense,
but it all began to fit into a marvelous kind of cosmic relatedness. My
sense of enchantment with the laws of the natural world caused me to
fizz over, and I found myself buttonholing my friends to tell them how
beautiful it all was. They were less than transfixed by my insights into
the webbings and beauties of the universe, although considerably
impressed by how exhausting it was to be around my enthusiastic
ramblings…. Slow down, Kay…. For God’s sake, Kay, slow down.

Of course it could be that you are psychologically normal but have
just fallen under the sway of some very weird ideas...the fact that
you can't actually explain these ideas but expect some weird
synchronicity to occur in the physical presence of others that will
allow you to convince them of the validity of these ideas is
suspicious though, it seems like a form of magical thinking.

But it's a testable and falsifiable hypothesis, no?

Sure. Would you consider the possibility that it is some kind of mental
disorder if you tried to explain your ideas to some people in person and they
didn't find your ideas coherent? Have you tried explaining them to anyone you
know already? And on this list Kevin Fischer offered to talk to you on Skype
for half an hour, I don't know if that would qualify as sufficiently in
person (if not, can you say what part of the world you live?)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Mark Buda

 Well, it's impossible to know what's going on with you based on a few
 email messages but it definitely sounds like it could be a manic state to
 me--this sort of grandiosity and boundless confidence in one's own
 abilities and powers is common in mania.

Of course it is. But note that I'm not claiming any extraordinary powers -
I'm claiming that I know something ineffable, something I cannot explain
to you except by talking to you in person. And even then I can't explain
it - I can just explain part of it. You will have to figure out the rest
on your own. The thing is, the part I can explain is different for
different people. If I don't know what you believe about the world, I
can't make what I know make sense to you, because part of what I know is
literally not true, from your perspective. It's a paradox.

If I'm correct, then there are only two other people in my subjective
universe who can understand the paradox, and I can't even be sure which
people those two are. Because of the nature of the paradox. If I knew who
one of them was, I wouldn't be able to know who the other one was. It's
sort of like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

Yes, it's exactly like the Heisenberg uncertainly principle. There are
three people in the universe who know what I know. If I interact with
somebody long enough to determine whether they know what I know, that sets
in motion a sequence of events that makes it impossible for me to know who
the other one is. I believe I know who they are, and I can't prove this
knowledge to either one of them without losing one of them. I think. It's
all very complicated, as I said.

 And having interacted with a friend in a manic state I would definitely
 say they can seem fairly normal if they choose to talk about
 subjects other than the grandiose and cosmic.

Because what we call mania is a manifestation of this same paradox in
somebody's psychology and/or brain chemistry, leading them to the eventual
resolution of the paradox in their subjective universe. They'll figure it
out eventually, although it may not appear that way to you.

 Have you been feeling particularly energetic or happy or alive lately?
 Any changes in your sensory experience, like colors and sounds seeming
 more vivid and beautiful? Do your body movements feel more coordinated,
 graceful, fluid?

No, none of that stuff.

 Would you consider the possibility that it is some kind of mental
 disorder if you tried to explain your ideas to some people in person and
 they didn't find your ideas coherent? Have you tried explaining them to
 anyone you know already?

Absolutely. And I've done so. Hell, I told a Catholic priest I was God and
I couldn't get him to admit that anything I was saying didn't make sense.
Although he wasn't sure what to do with the information. I sent email to
the pope last year asking politely what you were supposed to do to inform
the Catholic Church if you had a revelation from God, but I never got an
answer. Having been raised Catholic, I thought it fair to give them
another chance by asking a priest what I was supposed to do. He didn't
know. I talked to him twice. The first time, I couldn't explain it to him,
I just knew that I knew something important. The second time, I went into
more detail. I've figured some more stuff out, I'll probably talk to him
again. I'd rather talk to Richard Dawkins; it'd be easier to explain to
him.

You'd think the church would have some kind of procedure for dealing with
revelations, but apparently they're not as organized as they appear. I
intend to fix that.

 And on this list Kevin Fischer offered to talk to
 you on Skype for half an hour, I don't know if that would qualify as
 sufficiently in person (if not, can you say what part of the world you
 live?)

Yes, but I don't have Skype. If installing Skype and talking to Kevin
Fischer turns out to seem to be the best thing to do, I'll do it then, if
he's still willing.

I live near Washington, DC, USA.
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Quentin Anciaux

Well...

Did Gene Ray died the other night as you predicted ?

No, then go consult.

Simple as that.

Regards,
Quentin

2010/7/18 Mark Buda her...@acm.org

Of course it is. But note that I'm not claiming any extraordinary powers -
I'm claiming that I know something ineffable, something I cannot explain
to you except by talking to you in person. And even then I can't explain
it - I can just explain part of it. You will have to figure out the rest
on your own. The thing is, the part I can explain is different for
different people. If I don't know what you believe about the world, I
can't make what I know make sense to you, because part of what I know is
literally not true, from your perspective. It's a paradox.

If I'm correct, then there are only two other people in my subjective
universe who can understand the paradox, and I can't even be sure which
people those two are. Because of the nature of the paradox. If I knew who
one of them was, I wouldn't be able to know who the other one was. It's
sort of like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

Yes, it's exactly like the Heisenberg uncertainly principle. There are
three people in the universe who know what I know. If I interact with
somebody long enough to determine whether they know what I know, that sets
in motion a sequence of events that makes it impossible for me to know who
the other one is. I believe I know who they are, and I can't prove this
knowledge to either one of them without losing one of them. I think. It's
all very complicated, as I said.

And having interacted with a friend in a manic state I would definitely
say they can seem fairly normal if they choose to talk about
subjects other than the grandiose and cosmic.

Because what we call mania is a manifestation of this same paradox in
somebody's psychology and/or brain chemistry, leading them to the eventual
resolution of the paradox in their subjective universe. They'll figure it
out eventually, although it may not appear that way to you.

Have you been feeling particularly energetic or happy or alive lately?
Any changes in your sensory experience, like colors and sounds seeming
more vivid and beautiful? Do your body movements feel more coordinated,
graceful, fluid?

No, none of that stuff.

Would you consider the possibility that it is some kind of mental
disorder if you tried to explain your ideas to some people in person and
they didn't find your ideas coherent? Have you tried explaining them to
anyone you know already?

Absolutely. And I've done so. Hell, I told a Catholic priest I was God and
I couldn't get him to admit that anything I was saying didn't make sense.
Although he wasn't sure what to do with the information. I sent email to
the pope last year asking politely what you were supposed to do to inform
the Catholic Church if you had a revelation from God, but I never got an
answer. Having been raised Catholic, I thought it fair to give them
another chance by asking a priest what I was supposed to do. He didn't
know. I talked to him twice. The first time, I couldn't explain it to him,
I just knew that I knew something important. The second time, I went into
more detail. I've figured some more stuff out, I'll probably talk to him
again. I'd rather talk to Richard Dawkins; it'd be easier to explain to
him.

You'd think the church would have some kind of procedure for dealing with
revelations, but apparently they're not as organized as they appear. I
intend to fix that.

And on this list Kevin Fischer offered to talk to
you on Skype for half an hour, I don't know if that would qualify as
sufficiently in person (if not, can you say what part of the world you
live?)

Yes, but I don't have Skype. If installing Skype and talking to Kevin
Fischer turns out to seem to be the best thing to do, I'll do it then, if
he's still willing.

I live near Washington, DC, USA.
--
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Mark Buda

 Did Gene Ray died the other night as you predicted ?

 No, then go consult.

 Simple as that.

I don't know whether he died or not. Google doesn't seem to know either.
Since none of you seem interested in helping me (and I don't blame you,
but it was worth a shot) I'm going to send him an email later today and
tell him how I understand him and how I am going to bring Cubic Wisdom to
the world. I think he'll like that.

I don't believe in the no-win scenario. :-)
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Bruno Marchal


Jesse, Mark,


On 18 Jul 2010, at 17:20, Jesse Mazer wrote:



Well, it's impossible to know what's going on with you based on a  
few email messages but it definitely sounds like it could be a manic  
state to me--this sort of grandiosity and boundless confidence in  
one's own abilities and powers is common in mania. I definitely  
recommend checking out that Oliver Sacks article about mania I  
linked to above as you might recognize aspects of yourself in some  
of the descriptions (often self-descriptions from people in a manic  
state themselves). And having interacted with a friend in a manic  
state I would definitely say they can seem fairly normal if they  
choose to talk about subjects other than the grandiose and cosmic.



I concur. My friend did have mania (not schizophrenia). We can't  
conclude anything with Mark, but it looks, to me too, very much like  
symptoms of mania.
At some points anything in the news was interpreted by my friend as  
coincidence confirming his grandiose delirium. The most striking  
similarity here is the certainty feeling, the absence of doubt. As the  
rationalization of all defects of the theory, eventually ending by  
you can't understand but you will see. My friend also tried to  
involve notarious people from academy and media, writing letters, e- 
mail, and being absolutely sure they knew, or would understand.  
Through medication he came back to normal, but he killed himself. He  
was about defending his PhD thesis. I guess it did not bear the  
delusion.


There is a need for serious psychological support in case of  
medication. According to some, it may be better to let manic people to  
live their fantasy, which sometimes can fade away, instead of using  
medication which can lead to a too much sudden shocking awakening.


Mark, we may be wrong, but none of what you said makes very much sense  
for us. Some things you said may make sense, but seems to me humanly  
communicable only through math, fiction, art, poetry, ... and stands  
always very far away from any literal certainty.


Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Mark Buda

 Mark, we may be wrong, but none of what you said makes very much sense
 for us. Some things you said may make sense, but seems to me humanly
 communicable only through math, fiction, art, poetry, ... and stands
 always very far away from any literal certainty.

I know it doesn't make sense. I understand why it doesn't make sense. And
I understand why that knowledge is not communicable, thanks to Bruno.

Bear with me: the reason nobody can seem to figure this out is that the
truth is a paradox. Anybody who figures out the paradox can't communicate
the nature of the paradox without sounding crazy to *somebody*, because
it's a fucking paradox. It doesn't make sense to you until you have
already understood it, and then it's too late to explain it to anybody,
because they can't understand it any more. Get it? Good grief, even if the
stuff I'm saying taken as a whole doesn't make sense, at least focus on
one piece at a time and you will agree that I'm making perfect sense. I'm
not spouting words at random. I am a very literal-minded person who
chooses his words with great care. Word mean things. Words mean different
things to different people. That is the core of any failure to
communicate. That is why I have to talk to somebody to be able to make
sense to them and explain. I need the nonverbal feedback to be able to
figure out how to explain. All of us use nonverbal communication all the
time without even realizing it. It's unconscious.

I can make sense to Gene Ray because I understand part of what he's trying
to tell the world. But what I say to him would not make sense to you.

I can make sense to a Catholic priest because I was raised Catholic and I
understand the underlying world view. But what I say to him would not make
sense to an atheist.

I can make sense to a physicist because I understand enough of physics to
communicate with him. But what I say to him would not make sense to an
evolutionary biologist.

I can make sense to an evolutionary biologist. Any evolutionary biologist
will do. I have a special personal reason for wanting to contact Richard
Dawkins, because I have something to say to him that I think he wants to
hear. But the reasoning behind my desire to speak to Richard Dawkins is
not something I know how to explain to you, the members of the list,
because I don't know you all well enough to make sense to all of you at
once.

Bruno understands much of what I understand. In fact, everybody
understands part of what I understand. What I understand is God's plan for
the universe, His tricksy mathematical clockwork fractal rollercoaster
ride of life. Ooh, composing that last sentence gave me great insight into
the workings of the schizophrenic mind, but I said it anyway because I
thought it sounded cool.

Trust me. It'll all work out. A good night's rest might help you
understand. And I can even provide you with a plausible explanation of why
that is so.

This is starting to be fun.
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Andrew Hickey

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Mark Buda her...@acm.org wrote:
 Get it? Good grief, even if the
 stuff I'm saying taken as a whole doesn't make sense, at least focus on
 one piece at a time and you will agree that I'm making perfect sense.

Mark, seriously, you're not. I worked on a psychiatric ward for
several years, and you sound just like the schizophrenic and bipolar
people I dealt with there - many of whom were also convinced they were
making perfect sense when they were trying to explain to me how they
were really Jesus, Harry Potter and Superman in one body.
Please, see a psychiatrist. If nothing else, you could try to convince
*them* of your viewpoint. But I'm seriously worried about your health.


-- 
National Pep CDs - http://cdbaby.com/cd/nationalpep
The National Pep - Pop Music to hurt you forever - http://thenationalpep.co.uk

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Mark Buda

 On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Mark Buda her...@acm.org wrote:
 Get it? Good grief, even if the
 stuff I'm saying taken as a whole doesn't make sense, at least focus on
 one piece at a time and you will agree that I'm making perfect sense.

 Mark, seriously, you're not. I worked on a psychiatric ward for
 several years, and you sound just like the schizophrenic and bipolar
 people I dealt with there - many of whom were also convinced they were
 making perfect sense when they were trying to explain to me how they
 were really Jesus, Harry Potter and Superman in one body.
 Please, see a psychiatrist. If nothing else, you could try to convince
 *them* of your viewpoint. But I'm seriously worried about your health.

You worked on a psychiatric ward but you never understood them. If you had
taken the time to interact with them, one on one, and share their lives
and hopes and dreams, you would have been able to help them figure it out.
That's why marriage is important. Only by two people sharing the same
truth and faith can the species continue, whatever that species or truth
or faith or faith happens to be.

Don't worry. Be happy.
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Andrew Hickey

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Mark Buda her...@acm.org wrote:

 You worked on a psychiatric ward but you never understood them. If you had
 taken the time to interact with them, one on one, and share their lives
 and hopes and dreams, you would have been able to help them figure it out.

That is precisely what my job was, and what I did do - exceptionally
well, as it happens. I still have former patients see me in the street
and thank me for my help. They were ill, and now they're not. I am
becoming more and more convinced that you are, too. That's in no way a
criticism of you or failing on your part, any more than it would be if
you had a cold or a heart condition.
Please, seek medical help. If you're right, you lose nothing and might
convince at least the psychiatrist you talk to. If I'm right, you get
cured. It can't do you any harm, but leaving what looks to me like a
serious illness untreated may well do you some serious harm.

-- 
National Pep CDs - http://cdbaby.com/cd/nationalpep
The National Pep - Pop Music to hurt you forever - http://thenationalpep.co.uk

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-18 Thread Mark Buda

 On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Mark Buda her...@acm.org wrote:

 You worked on a psychiatric ward but you never understood them. If
 you had taken the time to interact with them, one on one, and share
 their lives and hopes and dreams, you would have been able to help
 them figure it out.

 That is precisely what my job was, and what IY did do - exceptionally
 well, as it happens. I still have former patients see me in the street
 and thank me for my help. They were ill, and now they're not.

Yes, because that's what makes them better. Love. Or whatever you want to
call it. Love is information! Or maybe information flow. Whatever.

 I am becoming more and more convinced that you are, too. That's in no
 way a criticism of you or failing on your part, any more than it would
 be if you had a cold or a heart condition.

I don't take it personally. I understand your position.

 Please, seek medical help. If you're right, you lose nothing and might
 convince at least the psychiatrist you talk to. If I'm right, you get
 cured. It can't do you any harm, but leaving what looks to me like a
 serious illness untreated may well do you some serious harm.

Look, I've already seen a psychiatrist and a priest and a therapist and
they don't see a problem here. Look. listen, and learn:

Every animal on this planet has evolved an instinctual means to care for
its young. Except us. We have no natural instinct. Or do we?

Holy crap. Richard Dawkins doesn't even understand the point of his own
books. Our sense of humor and our mathematical intuition and our genes
form an impossible triangular causal loop. Selfish gene, indeed.

Back to the point. We don't have instincts to tell us how to care for our
young. We rely on culture for that. And culture is still really, really
young. The memes are just getting started! That's it! Richard Dawkins is
God, then, because he is the source of the idea of the meme. Whee! What a
marvelous yet annoying thing God hath made. Can't wait to see what's next.

The evolutionary purpose of religion is as a cultural artifact to guide us
in raising our offspring. We need religion for this reason. That's why we
need faith. We have no fucking idea how to raise our children otherwise.
I've got it!
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-17 Thread Mark Buda

 On 16 Jul 2010, at 14:13, Mark Buda wrote:

 But the upshot of it is this: I have found out what happens when you
 commit quantum suicide. You discover that you believe a contradiction,
 and that even though nothing about the world has changed, you
 understand the universe.

 That seems very weird.

The whole universe is very weird. Quantum mechanics is weird. Another way
to say what I'm trying to says is that you *can't* commit quantum suicide,
because if you try, something will prevent you. Remember that guy on the
list who claimed to have planned to do it, but stopped because he fell in
love? I know why that happened. That's how it works. That's part of the
plan. You're supposed to fall in love and have children. The universe
works out that way.

 But you have a hard time explaining it.
 Because you discover that you are, in Bruno's terms, a Lobian machine
 interviewing itself for the laws of physics.

 But I am saying this to explain that we can use reason to understand
 where the laws of physics come from. Not to mystified people with a
 lack of explanation.

Bruno, I think the misunderstanding here is that you're thinking that
there's one set of laws of physics. And there isn't. There are no laws.
Reality is bound by rules, but the laws of physics aren't the real rules.
It just looks that way if you take the evidence-based approach to figuring
it out. If you take the faith-based approach to figuring it out, you find
God. It doesn't matter which way you go, it's circular, and you get to
choose.

 They're right and wrong, and I understand why, but I can't explain it,
 and Bruno understands why.

 I guess I have been unclear at some point. I am just a poor scientist
 trying to be honest with myself and the others.

Then there's something I'm assuming you understand that you don't in fact
understand. If we talked I could probably figure out what it was.

 Why do you want to convince Richard Dawkins? You give him credit.

Because I know that I know how to persuade him of the truth based on
evidence *and* emotion. I can prove to him, personally, that I am God, and
that I created the universe. And he will believe it. Because I can show
him a causal loop between the mental world, the physical world, and the
ficional world that explains both intelligent design *and* evolution. I
can show him how man's sense of humor and laughter evolved, and how
they're related to the causal loop. I can show him how love and the idea
of God evolved, and how they're related to the causal loop. I can show him
that Jesus was a real person, and was really God, and that the Catholic
Church he despises is just a bad copy of the real thing, and I can show
him how to fix it. And I can show the church how to fix it. But I have to
do it one day at a time, and I have to do it by *talking* to people, or
it's not worth my effort, because I have my own personal problems, and I
can show how *they* are related to all this. And I can explain how Hari
Seldon's psychohistory worked in Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy,
because I have figured the whole damn thing out.

What it all boils down to, guys, is that the reason marriage counseling
works is that when two people love each other but can't live together they
need a neutral third party to mediate because they can't understand each
other's arguments.

I understand Richard Dawkins and the Catholic Church well enough to get
them talking, if they'll listen to me. I don't know how to get their
attention without ruining my marriage. I'm trapped in God's logic trap.
I've done my best to talk to the Church - I have spent a couple of hours
with a priest, and he seems interested, but I can't figure out how to get
him to do anything helpful.

Is anybody willing to help me? I need help to get this done. I know the
help will come one way or another, but I'm asking the members of the list:
does anybody understand me or want to help me?
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-17 Thread Jesse Mazer

Why do you want to convince Richard Dawkins? You give him credit.

Because I know that I know how to persuade him of the truth based on
evidence *and* emotion. I can prove to him, personally, that I am God, and
that I created the universe. And he will believe it. Because I can show
him a causal loop between the mental world, the physical world, and the
ficional world that explains both intelligent design *and* evolution. I
can show him how man's sense of humor and laughter evolved, and how
they're related to the causal loop. I can show him how love and the idea
of God evolved, and how they're related to the causal loop. I can show him
that Jesus was a real person, and was really God, and that the Catholic
Church he despises is just a bad copy of the real thing, and I can show
him how to fix it. And I can show the church how to fix it. But I have to
do it one day at a time, and I have to do it by *talking* to people, or
it's not worth my effort, because I have my own personal problems, and I
can show how *they* are related to all this. And I can explain how Hari
Seldon's psychohistory worked in Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy,
because I have figured the whole damn thing out.

What it all boils down to, guys, is that the reason marriage counseling
works is that when two people love each other but can't live together they
need a neutral third party to mediate because they can't understand each
other's arguments.

I understand Richard Dawkins and the Catholic Church well enough to get
them talking, if they'll listen to me. I don't know how to get their
attention without ruining my marriage. I'm trapped in God's logic trap.
I've done my best to talk to the Church - I have spent a couple of hours
with a priest, and he seems interested, but I can't figure out how to get
him to do anything helpful.

Is anybody willing to help me? I need help to get this done. I know the
help will come one way or another, but I'm asking the members of the list:
does anybody understand me or want to help me?

Mark, if you're not kidding here I honestly think you may be experiencing some
kind of mental disorder, perhaps a manic state (good description of these kinds
of states by Oliver Sacks at
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/sep/25/a-summer-of-madness/?pagination=false
) or even the onset of schizophrenia...please consider seeing a psychiatrist,
just to check! Of course it could be that you are psychologically normal but
have just fallen under the sway of some very weird ideas...the fact that you
can't actually explain these ideas but expect some weird synchronicity to occur
in the physical presence of others that will allow you to convince them of the
validity of these ideas is suspicious though, it seems like a form of magical
thinking.

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-17 Thread Mark Buda

I'm not kidding. I understand your concern. If you were to interact with
me in real time I'd probably seem fairly normal (assuming I wanted to seem
normal, of course).

But it's a testable and falsifiable hypothesis, no?

The reason the explanation of reality sounds crazy is that the precise
form of the explanation depends on who is doing the explaining to whom.
That's why you can't write it down. It can't all make sense at the same
time to the same person, unless you're me. Got it? That's why you need me.
You can't get the answers any other way.

I think. It's really rather confusing.
--
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-17 Thread Kevin Fischer

I'm not kidding. I understand your concern

It's also statistically more likely if you're a male between 18-25... that's
when these sorts of brain farts are most common. It doesn't mean you're
crazy, but the most important step to understanding what you're thinking is
to understand that you're stuck in a set of thought patterns that is
different than your normal thought patterns.

You did post a testable prediction though -- that Gene Ray of Time Cube will
die today. Let's say that today means within 24 hours of your post.

If Gene Ray does die today, that would be reasonable evidence that you're
onto *something* here, but I would want to see three predictions like that
in a row to be sure. If he doesn't die today, would you accept that as
evidence that you have not developed superpowers of super understanding? If
Gene Ray doesn't die, the rational thing to do will be to accept your
failure and calmly move on, rather than come up with some complex reason to
rationalize it.

If you do need to talk to someone, I'm willing to talk to you via video on
Skype for 30 minutes or so. Send me an email off-list.

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Mark Buda her...@acm.org wrote:

Mark, if you're not kidding here I honestly think you may be experiencing
some kind of mental disorder, perhaps a manic state (good description of
these kinds of states by Oliver Sacks at

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/sep/25/a-summer-of-madness/?pagination=false
) or even the onset of schizophrenia...please consider seeing a
psychiatrist, just to check!

I'm not kidding. I understand your concern. If you were to interact with
me in real time I'd probably seem fairly normal (assuming I wanted to seem
normal, of course).

But it's a testable and falsifiable hypothesis, no?

I think. It's really rather confusing.
--
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-17 Thread Mark Buda

I'm not kidding. I understand your concern

 It's also statistically more likely if you're a male between 18-25...

Statistics govern groups. I am an individual. I am 42. As was my father
when I was born. What an interesting coincidence. Not.

 You did post a testable prediction though -- that Gene Ray of Time Cube
 will die today. Let's say that today means within 24 hours of your post.

Sure.

 If Gene Ray does die today, that would be reasonable evidence that you're
 onto *something* here, but I would want to see three predictions like that
 in a row to be sure.

Not only do I predict Gene Ray's death, but I can show you the
relationship between Time Cube and string theory! I am not making this up.
Why would I make this up?

 If he doesn't die today, would you accept that as
 evidence that you have not developed superpowers of super understanding?

I'm not claiming super powers of super understanding. In fact, it is pure
random luck that I happen to be in this position. I think.

 If Gene Ray doesn't die, the rational thing to do will be to accept your
 failure and calmly move on, rather than come up with some complex reason
 to rationalize it.

It wasn't some kind of ironclad guarantee. It was just a prediction. Based
on intuition, mainly.
-- 
Mark Buda her...@acm.org
I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-16 Thread Quentin Anciaux

Well your posts were funny for five minutes... but you know what ?

T'es lourd !

Bye.

2010/7/16 Mark Buda her...@acm.org

I came across this link some time ago and found it interesting:

http://www.paul-almond.com/CivilizationLevelQuantumSuicide.htm

In fact, I believe it is what introduced me to the term quantum
suicide. I had been googling something I had been thinking about in
the shower one day and to my surprise this guy had written a paper
about it. What an amazing coincidence. My life since then has been an
increasingly bizarre series of meaningful coincidences. Meaningful in
a personal way that I can't explain easily. Bruno understands and can
explain why I can't explain; it's to do with his G and G* logics.

But the upshot of it is this: I have found out what happens when you
commit quantum suicide. You discover that you believe a contradiction,
and that even though nothing about the world has changed, you
understand the universe. But you have a hard time explaining it.
Because you discover that you are, in Bruno's terms, a Lobian machine
interviewing itself for the laws of physics. But you can't get the
laws of physics yourself, even though you have all the answers.
Because you don't care any more - you have a different motivation. You
understand that since you have all the answers but none of the
questions, you need to talk to people. You figure out the right people
to talk to because your intuition guides you, because that's what it's
for.

There are people all around the world killing themselves and each
other for crazy reasons. Suicide bombers, for instance. People who
read stuff about the 2012 Mayan calendar thing and kill themselves
because they think the end of the world is coming.

They're right and wrong, and I understand why, but I can't explain it,
and Bruno understands why. But all that stuff happening around the
world is happening for a reason, and it doesn't matter what you - you
can't stop it. Neither can I. But you can listen to this and think
about it, and do whatever you feel like doing: you will anyway.

If any of you can help me contact Richard Dawkins and talk to him, I
can explain all of this. I can explain all of it to anybody if they're
willing to talk to me. But I have to talk face to face, because it's
too hard for me, psychologically, to figure out how to put it in
writing or over the phone, because a lot of human communication is non-
verbal, and there's an evolutionary reason for that which is part of
the whole thing.

Perhaps I sound mad, but I have a testable prediction: if I don't
contact Richard Dawkins, sooner or later somebody, somewhere is going
to be researching the 2012 Mayan calendar thing and be led, by an
amazing chain of coincidences, to me. And I can explain how that
works.

Bruno, when you read this, you are literally an angel of God. Figure
out who you need to talk to next. I certainly don't know. Maybe it's
me. Whatever works for you.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

2010-07-16 Thread Bruno Marchal



On 16 Jul 2010, at 14:13, Mark Buda wrote:


I came across this link some time ago and found it interesting:

http://www.paul-almond.com/CivilizationLevelQuantumSuicide.htm

In fact, I believe it is what introduced me to the term quantum
suicide. I had been googling something I had been thinking about in
the shower one day and to my surprise this guy had written a paper
about it. What an amazing coincidence. My life since then has been an
increasingly bizarre series of meaningful coincidences. Meaningful in
a personal way that I can't explain easily. Bruno understands and can
explain why I can't explain; it's to do with his G and G* logics.


This is on the fringe of authoritative argument.




But the upshot of it is this: I have found out what happens when you
commit quantum suicide. You discover that you believe a contradiction,
and that even though nothing about the world has changed, you
understand the universe.


That seems very weird.



But you have a hard time explaining it.
Because you discover that you are, in Bruno's terms, a Lobian machine
interviewing itself for the laws of physics.


But I am saying this to explain that we can use reason to understand  
where the laws of physics come from. Not to mystified people with a  
lack of explanation.




But you can't get the
laws of physics yourself, even though you have all the answers.


On the contrary: you can. Everyone can. You cannot besure because you  
cannot know that you are correct, so the usual doubt of the cartesian  
scientist remains. Computationalism explains in detail why any form of  
certainty, when made public, is a symptom of non correctness.




Because you don't care any more - you have a different motivation. You
understand that since you have all the answers but none of the
questions,


I don't see any sense here.



you need to talk to people. You figure out the right people
to talk to because your intuition guides you, because that's what it's
for.

There are people all around the world killing themselves and each
other for crazy reasons. Suicide bombers, for instance. People who
read stuff about the 2012 Mayan calendar thing and kill themselves
because they think the end of the world is coming.


2012 is the year of the election in France. The Maya consider their  
own prediction as a prediction that some reasonable man will arrive.  
They never talk of apocalypse. 2012 is like prohibition: making  
money by selling fears.





They're right and wrong, and I understand why, but I can't explain it,
and Bruno understands why.


I guess I have been unclear at some point. I am just a poor scientist  
trying to be honest with myself and the others.




But all that stuff happening around the
world is happening for a reason, and it doesn't matter what you - you
can't stop it. Neither can I. But you can listen to this and think
about it, and do whatever you feel like doing: you will anyway.

If any of you can help me contact Richard Dawkins and talk to him, I
can explain all of this.


Why do you want to convince Richard Dawkins? You give him credit.  
Actually you do his very own error, because when Dawkins try to  
convince the Christians that they are wrong on God, he gives them  
credit on their notion of God. No one care about fairy tales, once we  
tackle the fundamental question with the scientific (= modest,  
hypotheses-based) approach.





I can explain all of it to anybody if they're
willing to talk to me. But I have to talk face to face, because it's
too hard for me, psychologically, to figure out how to put it in
writing or over the phone, because a lot of human communication is  
non-

verbal, and there's an evolutionary reason for that which is part of
the whole thing.


Restrain yourself to communicate what is communicable. And just hope  
that the people will figure out by themselves what is not communicable  
yet true (like consciousness to take the simplest candidate).





Perhaps I sound mad, but I have a testable prediction: if I don't
contact Richard Dawkins, sooner or later somebody, somewhere is going
to be researching the 2012 Mayan calendar thing and be led, by an
amazing chain of coincidences, to me.


I don't believe in coincidence. Or better I believe coincidences are  
just that: coincidences. The brain has an habit to over-interpret  
coincidences, and if you search them, you will find more and more, and  
you will take the risk of believing anything, that is to become  
inconsistent. The prohibition of drugs is based on similar form of  
unsound reasoning.





And I can explain how that
works.

Bruno, when you read this, you are literally an angel of God. Figure
out who you need to talk to next. I certainly don't know. Maybe it's
me. Whatever works for you.



I talk to universal machines, because I know everyone is at least such  
a machine, and this is used for showing that what I say can be  
understood by any one having enough patience and good-willingness.


I am not for introducing

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide

21 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information