[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 203 KB, 625x1294, non-local universe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15299171 No.15299171 [Reply] [Original]

>muh physicalism
>muh eliminativism
>muh presumptive materialism
>muh non-neutral scientism
>muh measurements
>muh Dennett deepfakes
Alright you new age monists it's time to remind yourselves that last year's nobel prize in physics was awarded because the universe was proven to be non-localized. Please ponder these implications and proceed dispense with your certainty about the nature of consciousness and claiming it to be temporally non-continuous.

>> No.15299179

>>15299171
It is mostly one schizo who samefags pretending to be other people. You cant win an argument with a schizo so you are wasting your breath. He will continue on with the same debunked arguments ad infitum. His goal is simply to create chaos for attention because he is a narcissist

>> No.15299195
File: 2 KB, 125x117, 1679703322581.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15299195

Idealism is an intellectually lazy ideology. It abuses the incompleteness of physicalism as an excuse for escaping into a solipsistic "it just is" fantasy world. The idealist fears the burden of actually having to explain shit. A true high IQ genius Chad like myself accepts the inherent dualism of the mental and the physical world while aspiring to investigate the mechanism of their interaction which is rooted in quantum mechanics.

>> No.15299204

>>15299195
No Deepak Chopra, sir Roger Penrose saying something about quantum stuff doesn't make you more legitimate

>> No.15299209

>>15299204
Penrose, von Neumann, Wigner, Schrödinger, Bohm, and now me - the greatest geniuses of quantum mechanics are in agreement about the fundamental role of consciousness.

>> No.15299266

>the universe is non-local
where's my fuckin time machine then bud? show me your spooky INSTANT action at an unlimited distance - for real this time. Break casuality in half. Negative density. C'mon, you can do it now. Oh, you can't do any of those things? Nobody expects anybody to be able to do any of those things in spite of your braindead opinion? Wow, I guess the universe must be localized then. Get bent, get unbent, and then get stuffed, idiot.

>> No.15299358
File: 1.49 MB, 1200x1000, batman.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15299358

>>15299209
>and now me

>> No.15300013

>>15299171
If the universe functioned non-locally this would raise some distressing questions about topology, and as far as we can tell the universe works on manifolds rather than Euclidean geometry.

>> No.15300014

>>15299171
those three stooges didn't deserve a nobel. they didn't prove nonlocality, lmao. they didn't prove anything. none of the assumptions of bell's theorem have actually been tested. they can't be tested, in fact. also, nonlocality would not be evidence of idealism, please stop using this stupid argument.

>> No.15300015

>>15300013
Watch out, guys! This undergrad right here has learned about manifolds last week and is now ready to debunk quantum mechanics!

>> No.15300016

>>15299195
started off as a good post bashing idealists, but then you spoiled it at the end.

>> No.15300020

>>15300015
I am not deboonking anything as I just say one of the two is obviously extremely hard to easily accept, and the claim by the researchers at least one of these must be false.
It's just hard for me to conceptualize how actions at a distance could work if, given a space's topology, the space can't "predict" where a trajectory will end up, say, a billion light years away, as by definition the space is only defined by its immediate environs.

>> No.15300033

>>15300020
Sure, as long as you're stuck in the world view of an undergrad who barely just learned about manifolds, you're not ready yet to think about solutions to this problem. But that's your own limitation and not a limitation of physics.

>> No.15300042

>>15299195
>it just is
If it isn't it, then what is it?

>> No.15300058

escapist idiots babbling about their imaginary intellect and insightfulness, both self assigned with no evidence to back them up.
imagine grandiosely conferring superintellignce on yourself, but your suppose intellectual brilliance can't be put to any worthwhile use? shouldn't they be smart enough to figure out a convincing and value use of their enormous brains?
>i know everything about the entire universe from beginning to end
>no, i have no way to prove this, you'll just have to trust me
>i imagine myself to be super smart so you have to also
>brb sniffing my own delicious farts