I know how complex their society can be, but I also know that their society isn’t producing tools, houses, or language like we do. Why?
Of course their houses, tools, and language aren’t the same as a human! They are crows! They use crow-specific language, make tools to fit their physiology, and build crow houses. WTF.
Are you moving the goalposts again?
1 Like
Okay, then let’s say that crow societies evolve at the same pace as other species. But human culture evolves much faster. In the last 3,000 years, our culture has changed significantly, whereas crows, I think, live pretty much the same way they always have.
Why is there this difference?
Sigh…this is getting silly. There is a difference because humans and crows are different species.
1 Like
Agreed.
I’m saying there’s persistent disingenuousness at work here as an attempt to troll.
But you know, perhaps all the rest of us just misunderstand intentions. And meanings. And claims. And how to determine the realness of things.
1 Like
You asked me why I don’t see reality as a simplistic mechanical process and to provide evidence. I explained how quantum mechanics has shown that information can alter material reality. In other words, knowing changes reality, at least at the quantum level—literally and scientifically. You seem unable to grasp the implications of this.
I’m not saying this leads to the existence of God; I’m just reiterating what I said at the beginning: reality is not the simplistic mechanical process we are told it is. I provided evidence—what more do you want?
I also find our understanding of reality primitive. Specifically, I find it amusing that we simulate our own voice in our heads to think. Then, somehow, we ended up talking about crows.
Why am I being called dishonest? I’m just trying to answer your questions.
Someone just isn’t paying attention. (Straw Man Fallacy) Were reality a simplistic mechanical process, we would not need scientific inquiry. There would be no need for new discoveries. And, no one would be saying, “I don’t know.” The fact that we do not know things, does not leave the door open to the supernatural, transcendental, spiritual, or metaphysical. Not without ‘EVIDENCE.’ Science is very complex and time-consuming.
There is no reason to believe in bullshit until you have seen a bull taking a shit, captured it on video, presented it to peers, dragged a bull into a controlled environment, set up an experiment, and seen a bull shit under controlled conditions, then you must present bullshit to peers and face their ridicule. They have no reason to believe you until they repeat your experiment themselves and receive the same results. Only after they have attempted to prove you wrong, in as many ways as they can possibly think of, will your bullshit be accepted as possible. With confirmation, it may begin to be used. With continued use and effectiveness of results and verification, it could reach the status of a theory. If you feed a bull, it will shit. Bullshi is real. But this happens only after the idea has received independent verification and it becomes a known fact that bulls actually shit. Only then, can we begin believing bullshit is an actual thing.
So, your dishonesty lies in your complete ignorance of the importance of scientific bullshit.
1 Like
-
The fact that information (knowledge) alters reality is clearly demonstrated at the quantum level; hence, “knowing” influences matter. This suggests that reality is not merely a material process. We now have evidence that reality responds to properties previously assumed to be purely subjective or mental, such as knowledge.
-
The fact that qualia exist as an objective reality, yet cannot be measured, observed, shared, or studied (as has been extensively discussed), demonstrates that not all dimensions of reality can currently be examined using the scientific method.
-
The fact that matter is not entirely predictable—due to the inherent randomness in quantum mechanics’ collapse function—proves that material reality, at least at the quantum level, does not always follow predictable behavior.
A deep analysis of what we currently know reveals evidence not only for new areas of research but also for potential connections between mind and matter, which have significant implications. However, many people remain reluctant to acknowledge this. Nevertheless, everything I have mentioned is based on facts, not opinions.
Moreover, I have consistently provided numerous papers and references to support my claims. I am not afraid of the truth.
-
You have said nothing to alter the facts previously presented. The time to believe is after a demonstration and not before.
-
Qualia isn’t even a theory, he philosophers’ concept of qualia is an artifact of bad theorizing, and in particular, of **failing to appreciate the distinction between the intentional object of a belief and the cause of that belief, ***
-
It’s called quantum for a reason. It follows ‘QUANTUM’ behavior. Sheesh! We have Euclidian and non-euclidian geometry, We have Newtonian gravity and Einstein’s gravity. We have Physics and quantum physics. You’re comparing apples to oranges. We have made a paradigm shift and left you wallowing in the past.
And nothing you have said has anything to do with the world we live in. We do not live in the quantum universe. Your assistance that the quantum world has something to do with our everyday perception of reality is a reductio ad absurdum argument.
Explain to me how knowledge of quantum physics is going to help me cross the street, buy a loaf of bread, or swim across the pool. Your not even close to dealing with reality.
Potential? You mean - nothing yet? You mean - “Imagined.” Do you even mean 'Possible?" On what would you base a possibility that mind influences matter?
Does the change in the behavior of particles seen in Young’s double-slit experiment really suggest that consciousness can alter matter and exist separately from the brain?
1 Like
This is NOT what I’m saying. I’m saying that information alters matter, not consciousness. I try to use words properly and honestly.
Information is not the same as consciousness. I’m not jumping to conclusions; I’m strictly referring to what has already been demonstrated. The presence of information (i.e., unequivocal data about the state of a quantum system) alters the behavior of particles. That’s all I’m saying—nothing more, nothing about God or anything magical. I’m stating exactly this.
Now, consider this: based on what we know as facts, a mechanism like the brain, which produces information on a massive scale, could potentially have a physical effect on matter because it is generating information. I don’t know the full consequences of this, but perhaps we should stop viewing the universe solely as a matter-based problem and begin seeing it as one involving both matter and information, which defines matter. Because this is literally true.
citation please
In what way are you using the word “information”
2 Likes
That’s because you made what I considered a flimsy assertion that could be dismantled using crows as just one example. Do you think that it is inappropriate for that example to be used in a debate forum?
You may not be afraid of it but I’m not convinced you recognize it.
1 Like
LOL, Doesn’t that just figure?
And now we take you back to Sheldon, who has a hell of a lot more patience with trolls than I do.
You wanted to know what information means at the quantum level, and I posted a citation for you.
Now I’m a troll, without any further elaboration…
What you posted was a tautology. " Quantum information is the information of the state of a quantum system.
What is a quantum state? Also a tautology: The Quantum system is a composite system generated from different Quantum states .
.
Did you read beyond the first sentence?
Doesn’t this link provide all the information and references needed to understand what information at the quantum level means?
You asked for a citation… well, here it is.
Or do you want me to summarize it?
From the Wikipedia page you linked to:
It is an interdisciplinary field that involves quantum mechanics, computer science, information theory, philosophy and cryptography among other fields.
Do you have the relevant background to actually understand what quantum information is? Once upon a time I did a Ph.D. in physics, I have been doing R&D for a living for in excess of a couple of decades, and the field in question is still quite at the outermost border of my field of knowledge. It is quite a specialised field. So unless you have actual in-depth knowledge of the field of quantum information, I sincerely doubt that you understand it. But then again, I might be wrong. Be my guest, summarise it, and impress me.
4 Likes
PLEASE! I would love to hear…
2 Likes