The Astral Pulse

Integral Philosophy => Welcome to Integral Philosophy! => Topic started by: HindSight on March 13, 2018, 02:10:05



Title: Suppose you have a fire cracker...
Post by: HindSight on March 13, 2018, 02:10:05
Suppose you have a fire cracker. From the attomic point of view you know the very placement of every atom and the electrons, protons and neutrons that make it. Those particals create the gun powder, fuze and the paper that holds its together. The fuze spontaneously ignites within a vast vaccum chamber. In theory, with presice physics, you can pinpoint exactly where each atom will end up.
 Yes I talk about the 'big bang'. Iv pondered about this recently so with that being said, are our physical destinies not pre determined? Are we not 'exactly where we should be' by this concept?
    From this physical passing we should remain observant, or is that still just the expanding of particals which make up those observations, this thought, and this article I'm writing? Is the way we react to the physical outside of this paradigm or is it part of it?
   I know the questions i ask are unanswerable but I'd like to hear your thoughts. We are just informational beings sharing information for the betterment of humanity. Open my mind for me  :-P


Title: Re: Suppose you have a fire cracker...
Post by: Xanth on March 13, 2018, 02:48:36
Suppose you have a fire cracker. From the attomic point of view you know the very placement of every atom and the electrons, protons and neutrons that make it. Those particals create the gun powder, fuze and the paper that holds its together. The fuze spontaneously ignites within a vast vaccum chamber. In theory, with presice physics, you can pinpoint exactly where each atom will end up.
 Yes I talk about the 'big bang'. Iv pondered about this recently so with that being said, are our physical destinies not pre determined? Are we not 'exactly where we should be' by this concept?
    From this physical passing we should remain observant, or is that still just the expanding of particals which make up those observations, this thought, and this article I'm writing? Is the way we react to the physical outside of this paradigm or is it part of it?
   I know the questions i ask are unanswerable but I'd like to hear your thoughts. We are just informational beings sharing information for the betterment of humanity. Open my mind for me  :-P
Actually, more you pin down an atom's exact position, the less you can know about it's momentum/direction. 
And the more you can pin down an atom's momentum/direction, the less you can know about it's position.
Hence, you can never know the exact position *AND* the exact direction of an atom at the same time.

It's called the "Uncertainty Principle":  https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
So no, we can't pinpoint exactly where an atom will end up.  It's part of the quantum mystery.  :)


Title: Re: Suppose you have a fire cracker...
Post by: Nameless on March 13, 2018, 07:22:25
Can't get past the vacuum chamber. Seems a dead end to me. I 'think' though have no reference than my thoughts that pre-destination is limited. If I make it 'this' far then the next step will be (fill in the blank). If I make it there then the next step will be (fill in the blank).

In other words destination might be determined but course and path, not necessarily.


Title: Re: Suppose you have a fire cracker...
Post by: ThaomasOfGrey on March 15, 2018, 04:09:17
Suppose you have a fire cracker. From the attomic point of view you know the very placement of every atom and the electrons, protons and neutrons that make it. Those particals create the gun powder, fuze and the paper that holds its together. The fuze spontaneously ignites within a vast vaccum chamber. In theory, with presice physics, you can pinpoint exactly where each atom will end up.

Yes, with a perfect physics simulator and all of the data it should be possible to deterministically predict the outcome of an event. The problem is that doing that requires extraordinary computation resources.

Imagine it was your problem to solve - "how can we generate physical realities" - given powerful, but finite, processing and memory power. You could generate one deterministic reality. Or for the same price you could generate thousands of probabilistic realities. That means that the firecracker can be viewed as an algorithm that closely models deterministic behavior but it is really just a random quantum draw each time it blows up.

My view is that we live in the probabilistic reality because it fits the quantum physics data better and it is more sensible from an architectural point of view. Looking into the future we can make predictions about how the random draws are going to turn out but they can only ever be semi-accurate. In truth there are decisions being made outside of this reality system that impacts what happens inside. Your model would need to also account for choices of beings, and I think most of us would argue that many of those choices don't fully take place inside the physical system. A deterministic model needs the full picture, we would have to hoist it up to the dimension which contains ours as a subset to capture all the variables. That seems like an infinite cascade of dependencies since we are told that each dimension influences those beneath it.