Unseen

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 2,286 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #40155

    Unseen
    Participant

    The reason mathematics is a toolset for understanding the world, is that it captures logical properties of the world, and so, it has to be discovered, just as the world has to be discovered.

    Mathematics cannot tell me the real length of the coast of Great Britain. Measured in meters, it’s one length. Measured in millimeters, it’s far longer. Measured in Planck lengths…? Tell me what mathematics has helped me to understand about the length of the coast of Great Britain? I seem to know less in some regards.

     

    • This reply was modified 13 hours, 3 minutes ago by  Unseen.
    #40148

    Unseen
    Participant

    Even mathematics doesn’t have a theory of everything

    For all we know, there may be a theory that explains all of mathematics.

    Goedel notwithstanding?

    #40146

    Unseen
    Participant

    My contribution to Sunday School this week. These bozos are undoubtedly worried about preserving Christianity in addition to their white supremacy and fascism.

    These wannabe thugs claim that Europeans were the original Americans (Native Americans notwithstanding, I guess).

    Well, the people they are referring to, presumably our Founding Fathers, came from England or were descended from Englishmen mostly, and whether the British Isles is to be regarded as part of Europe is highly disputable. A lot of continental Europeans and not a few Brits would say No.

    However, if these shmoes want to go back to Europe (Spain, Portugal, Germany, Russia, France, etc.), let’s buy them plane tickets.

    P.S.—I don’t see any women in the group, so I wonder if these guys are also incels in addition to being pathetic examples of manhood.

    #40132

    Unseen
    Participant

    Unseen, You are, knowingly or not, taking a position similar to Anti-Natalism, which argues that since all life inherently involves some pain, even if it’s just the prick of a needle or a crick in the neck, it is therefore immoral to bring other human beings into the world. The Anti-Natalists’ position is broader in that they think is applies to generations on Earth as well as hypothetical generations in Interstellar space. It kinda hard to argue against. Whenever some bave asked me why I don’t have children, I motion around and say: “What? And leave them all this?” 😁

    I do think it’s immoral to bring children into the world as, basically, slaves to a program initiated by a group of people on a planet of origin that may be lifeless or humanless by the time the plan reaches fruition.

    #40116

    Unseen
    Participant

    @The Enco…

    What happens to the charge for MRI’s, for example, if instead of several hospitals sharing one and splitting the costs, each hospital has its own and has to pay for the device on its own? Which of the states offers the lowest cost MRI’s?

    #40114

    Unseen
    Participant

    @TheEnco…

    What is the other side of the story. The one presented to the public to justify these restriction?

    In other words, “The public needs this regulation because _______ and benefits in these ways ________.”

    #40108

    Unseen
    Participant

    If the destination planet is so like Earth that it’s habitable to humans, there may be an intelligent race there none too happy over our arrival and perhaps with the weapons to match or exceed ours in destructive power. They might be thousands of years ahead of us. They might destroy the party of earthlings hundreds of millions or more miles away from the destination.

    Most first contact movies are about aliens arriving here. Few are about humans arriving on another habitable world. Generally, though, in those movies, it doesn’t go well for one side or the other: In Event Horizon, for example, it doesn’t go well for the humans, whereas in The Martian Chronicles, it doesn’t go well for the poor Martians.

    Here is the crucial scene from the very best first contact movie ever made:

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 2 days ago by  Unseen.
    #40107

    Unseen
    Participant

    It is certainly morally ambiguous to say the least, to impose such a life on a child (living their lives on a spaceship with the goal of breeding more children to do the same) without much of a chance to opt out and turn back. I would say the stakes would have to be pretty high to allow that (extreme over population or end of world situation). In any case, hopefully by the time interstellar travel was feasible, there would be technology by then to hibernate humans or even freeze them (or some safe equivalent). In any case, if they did go ahead, they would certainly need extremely well thought out policies, amble psychological preparation and education for the following generations and thousands of contingency plans for everything.

    To have the best chance at being ethically justified, the best situation would have the people who volunteered to start the trip be the crew at the end with no lost middle generations. Of course, that would require pretty thoroughly robotic ship.

    Policies are a problem. Must the crew live with them no matter what? Are they immutable? Who enforces them? Would the ship come along with a goon squad to put down populist rebellions?

    In effect though, your question Unseen opens up a can of worms. Would two parents who live in a safe developed country who move to a less safe or even dangerous country and have a child there (for whatever reason they have) be subjecting their child to a dismal environment against their will (or at least before they could ask their consent)?

    This is easy. At least, if you’re on Earth you can, in principle at least, bail on a situation you dislike.

    #40105

    Unseen
    Participant

    Post deleted for messed up formatting. I’ll try again. LOL

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 2 days ago by  Unseen.
    #40098

    Unseen
    Participant

    Wormholes may be viable shortcuts through space-time after all, new study suggests.

    I admit to skimming, but I didn’t catch the part where you have any idea where you’ll end up? A scouting party? How do they get back?

    The problem is all about the distances to the nearest potentially habitable planets, even within the Milky Way. To travel one light year is similar to traveling around the diameter of the Earth 36,000,000 times in one year (without even stopping for a picnic). Planets on the “other side” of our galaxy are up to 100.000 light years away and the nearest galaxy. Andromeda is about 2,500,000 light years away. If a spaceship left Earth today for Andromeda and another left in 10,000 years time, the latter would get there first due to technological advantages.

    Suppose you’re in cryostasis for all those years. Your ship is traveling through space at near the speed of light (as if that’s even possible) and space isn’t really empty. There’s dust clouds and even the occasional pebbles and rocks floating around. What is the effect on the hull integrity of the ship of hitting that sort of stuff at that speed?

    What is your purpose in going? Just to satisfy your own curiosity? It can’t be to return home or relay your findings back home somehow. The problems with that are all too obvious starting with there’s likely to be nobody home.

    #40089

    Unseen
    Participant

    Can quantum mechanics explain consciousness?

    In a word, no.

    At least, not in any ordinary understanding of “to explain something.”

    Suppose Penrose and Hameroff’s ideas turn out to be true (and can be proven to be true, a dubious possibility in itself), what new treatments might come of it? Even true explanations wouldn’t mean much pragmatically. So, suppose quantum mechanics explains color perception, a big ask, does it really result in UNDERSTANDING color perception?

    In a more practical vein, “Well, we checked your subatomic particles and we now know how to treat your bipolar disorder.”

    #40083

    Unseen
    Participant

    @TheEnco…

    That was one wild tale of woe. Is there an article you can recommend that documents those restrictions all in one place?

    #40077

    Unseen
    Participant

    In Atheists We Distrust (Scientific American article)

    From the article:

    Gervais and his colleagues presented participants with a story about a person who accidentally hits a parked car and then fails to leave behind valid insurance information for the other driver. Participants were asked to choose the probability that the person in question was a Christian, a Muslim, a rapist, or an atheist. They thought it equally probable the culprit was an atheist or a rapist, and unlikely the person was a Muslim or Christian.

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 3 days ago by  Unseen.
    #40072

    Unseen
    Participant

    What is the face of atheism to most in the public? What can we do about it?

    Don’t we spend a lot of energy telling people that their core beliefs are nonsense?

    What a way to win friends and influence people.

    #40071

    Unseen
    Participant

    I didn’t raise this topic to talk only about hospitals. That was just an example of how religious organizations affect public perception. And they do good. I’ve been in hospitals several times and with one exception they were all affiliated with Catholicism. I remember being visited by a Catholic chaplain who asked me if I’d be interested in praying with him. I told him that’s not my thing, and he left. No pressure.

    Our reputation is such that anything like an “Atheist General Hospital” would be avoided like the plague by most religious people.

     

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 2,286 total)