Re: fate/destiny in fiction

Gods Ghost wrote:

Rofl, you have given no such evidence, only assumptions and misunderstandings, as well as a self admitted lack of evidence

lolol You dont know the difference between paranoia and schizo.

  Paranoia is paranoia and is defined within a complex of mental disorders, just like thoughts of suicide.  Now, if the FDA finds that even just 4% of 10-24 year olds have enhanced thoughts of suicide that may have been there all along within a mental condition of "depression" for which they will be given an SSRI like Zoloft is above an acceptable level of side-effect, why would 20% of all persons given marijuana having side-effect of enhanced levels of mental-disorder, paranoia, be acceptable? Just what level of suicide thoughts is good for you -- any that does not lead to death? And just what level of paranoia is good for you -- any that does not lead to death?



Gods Ghost wrote:

See, it wasnt an imaginary universe conjured by Heisen, it was a proven fact about the reality WE live in.

No it is not.  It is a set of analytical mathematical equations and conjectures on what they mean.  "Interpretation" means interpretation. "Analytical" means: Of a proposition that is necessarily true independent of fact or experience.  All analytical interpretations of QM are independent of facts and experience and in Cartesian fashion assumed to be true whether or not there are facts to show they are true. There are no facts or experience that demonstrate CI (and M-theory, by the way) -- as only analytical conjecture -- "true" in any epistemological way, only in an imaginary way.


Gods Ghost wrote:

The experiment has a difinitive outcome,

There is no "definite outcome" on whether light is a wave or particle. They are both outcomes, empirically. That is why scientists are speculating, not pontificating, as you do.

Quote Post 76

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

Paranoia is paranoia

My apologies for not elaborating as efficiently as I should have. "behaviors associated with paranoia." (aka, increased fear) Not "Paranoia."
These people are not given a mental condition by the substance. Show me one study that says otherwise, or stop saying it. Smh.

And lets see this study you keep touting. Not only do I doubt your... interpretation, lol, but I would also be willing to bet that its findings were skewed by funding from a pharmaceutical corp even at that.

And these people arent hurting themselves or others, so Im not sure why you keep incorrectly associating it with anti depressants (which, btw, you have no understanding of how they are prescribed or the reasoning behind their increase in thoughts of self harm. I have studied this. You have not.)

And at the absolute worst, it is a far better substance on the body and mind, with far less negative effects, than alcohol, and that is sold on every corner. I dont hear you arguing against it with such enthusiasm, despite many, many studies that show its (*cough* real *cough*) negative effects.

Or tobacco products...

Or many preservatives...

Or emulsifiers...

Lmao. Of all the stands you could pick, you do not pick wisely.

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

It is a set of analytical mathematical equations and conjectures on what they mean.  "Interpretation" means interpretation. "Analytical" means: Of a proposition that is necessarily true independent of fact or experience.  All analytical interpretations of QM are independent of facts and experience and in Cartesian fashion assumed to be true whether or not there are facts to show they are true. There are no facts or experience that demonstrate CI (and M-theory, by the way) -- as only analytical conjecture -- "true" in any epistemological way, only in an imaginary way.

Actually, no. And, most of what you said was gibberish. The outsome of the double slit is a factual outcome. It is what happened. There is no getting around that. The interpretations are merely disagreements on HOW that happened. Which, as I have already addressed, your flagship theory that exists solely on the coat tails of the lack of a completely solidified CI isnt too great of a theorum, and is deteriorating quickly. All it is is a desperate grasp at straws to hold onto materialism in any form.

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

There is no "definite outcome" on whether light is a wave or particle. They are both outcomes, empirically. That is why scientists are speculating, not pontificating, as you do.

The fact of the matter is that they change when observed/measured. This is the entire basis behind QM CI. How do YOU interpret the DATA from the double slit exp ? That you dont understand this change and likely dont understand the double slit belies your ignorance on the subject.

It is EITHER CI, OR PW, or a couple of lesser known and less than realistic potentials. The point is, there are only a small number of ways for what is PROVEN to happen within the double slit to actually happen, and only one of them actually makes sense to get behind.

Quote Post 77

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

And, btw, you exist in a reality in which one of the interpretations of QM is in governance. Pretending that you dont exist in a reality with gravity, or light, or quantum mechanics doesnt put ME into the realm of imagination. It puts YOU into the realm of imagination.

It is you that wants to live in an imaginary universe where your actions dont matter and have no true consequences, where time is real (which goes against QMPW, btw), and where all that you see is all that matters. Unfortunately (for you), thanks to the predominate theory behind QM, that is shown to almost certainly not be the case. Still, it begs the question, why do you so vehimently oppose a reality where choice matters ? Do you REALLY think we are here for nothing more than a worthless jaunt with no meaning behind it whatsoever ? Or is that simply more comforting to you, thus you wish to hold onto it ?

See, it isnt me that lives in the imaginary universe. I work and attempt to learn and understand the one we live in. And, just so you know, it is about far more than just the physical. The learning experiences we have here are just that, for learning. And, we cannot truly learn without free will. But that is just my... inference. To understand reality is to understand its place, its purpose, and an entire universe without a purpose is simply fantasy. This is what gives our choices weight, and this is why we should make our choices as good as we can, not reduce them to being outside our power.

Quote Post 78

79 Reply by njc

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

Gods Ghost wrote:

Also, calling me on a minor spelling error ? lol

This is a writer's site.  I was offering a helpful edit. smile

Quote Post 79

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

lol fair enough. Yeah, I dont pay too much attention to spelling or grammar unless Im writing something serious lol. Same reason I dont use apostrophes unless it would interfere with what Im conveying. Im actually pleasantly surprised at the lack of grammatical corrections I have received here. People on facebook and other sites hound over it as if it meant they were a greater person for it. lol. I can, however, appreciate a helpful edit. lol.

Tell me what you think of the rest of my reply. Pretty good, or no ?

Quote Post 80

81 Reply by njc

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

I don't have a lot of time right now.

I think you've stated your case well, but it's not enough to convince me.

It comes back to interpretations of destiny and choice.  If someone could look at my future and read it, would that mean I was not free to make the choices that lead to it?

Theologians have thought about this a lot, especially Catholic theologians, since in order to give us free will, God (as Catholics understand God) must not only withdraw omnipotence but must assent to and participate in every act flowing from our free will.  (Which makes sin pretty horrible.)  They see paths out of the paradox.

The Copenhagen Interpretation may be right, and yet it seems that every attempt to close the door on alternate theories does not quite succeed.  I'm not convinced.  The question may yet be decided.  The question may remain open.  That's all I know.  My sense of fitness is against the CI, but that doesn't count for a mound of Maxwell House.  I'm just not going to commit o the CI being the 'real' fit for the evidence so long as there is an alternative explanation that's scientifically plausible and that looks better to me.

Quote Post 81

82 Reply by Gods Ghost (edited by Gods Ghost 2015-07-01 06:39:32)

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

Understandable. I certainly wouldnt want you to commit to anything simply on my accord. I merely want to create thought about it. And, in turn, this has made me think much about it. There was a moment while researching for the convos in this thread that I, for a moment, had to consider the full fledged possibility that I would come out the other end believing in Pilot Wave. I even had my apology post on here partially written in my head lol, as well as the various changes to my belief system that would require. That, to me, is a pretty good position to find oneself in now and then. I think, if we stop questioning our own beliefs, it leads to much higher chances of being wrong, and creates a stagnancy in forward progression.

I would only ask you to think about things yourself. I was raised Christian. Needless to say, I am no longer Christian. That is not to say, though, that I do not see a certain positivity or benefit within the belief, as well as some negatives. I think there is good and bad in just about every belief system, but I found none of it to be all encompassing of what I know to be true (personally, in addition to the scientific advances we have made). That is why I set out to create my own belief system. That our souls power reality, and that conservation of the proverbial cpu usage is the cause of the observer effect, that is my belief system. I created it. As far as I know, I am the very first to say it, the very first to think of it or to put it into an organized system of belief. I could be wrong, of course, but my point is that I am a supporter of people finding their own way. So I support you in not simply hopping on board with me simply because I make a few arguments. lol

I appreciate that you took the time to reply, and apologize if I have taken too much of it already. Thanks for the discussion. Have an excellent night. (and Charles, too, if he comes across this)

Quote Post 82

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

Gods Ghost wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

Paranoia is paranoia

My apologies for not elaborating as efficiently as I should have. "behaviors associated with paranoia." (aka, increased fear) Not "Paranoia."
These people are not given a mental condition by the substance. Show me one study that says otherwise, or stop saying it.

They exist in a mental-illness condition, before and after. The question for you to answer is to what degree ought a drug pusher legally increase that mental-illness condition, all the way to death? or little less than that?  FDA says none.  Why do you disagree with the FDA?


Gods Ghost wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

It is a set of analytical mathematical equations and conjectures on what they mean.  "Interpretation" means interpretation. "Analytical" means: Of a proposition that is necessarily true independent of fact or experience.  All analytical interpretations of QM are independent of facts and experience and in Cartesian fashion assumed to be true whether or not there are facts to show they are true. There are no facts or experience that demonstrate CI (and M-theory, by the way) -- as only analytical conjecture -- "true" in any epistemological way, only in an imaginary way.

Actually, no.

Actually, yes.  Interpretation means interpretation.  and analytical means analytical. The fact is all experiments show light (and simply life itself to the aware observer) as a wave and a particle, and all interpretations of that fact are interpretations, not fact.


Gods Ghost wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

There is no "definite outcome" on whether light is a wave or particle. They are both outcomes, empirically. That is why scientists are speculating, not pontificating, as you do.

The fact of the matter is that they change when observed/measured.

That is not "fact" but an interpretation.

Quote Post 83

Re: fate/destiny in fiction

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Gods Ghost wrote:

And, btw, you exist in a reality in which one of the interpretations of QM is in governance.

It is my opinion and any reasonable person's opinion that there is no existing valid "interpretation" , and all such interpretations are unnecessary to consider QM a valid theory both in pure and applied sciences.  Analogously, no engineer need believe in gravity waves (or in Relativity or in QM or in Big Bang,  . . . ) to build a bridge.

It is, however, in order to participate in a democratic republic, necessary to believe in clinical medical evidence against legalizing a substance that in any positive light has far more deleterious effect on every human being than it could have good.

Quote Post 84