Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Simulations/matrix and the speed of light

  1. Top | #31
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    719
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,605
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    During our last simulation operation meeting it was decided the excreationist function will be deletedd. It has become too erratic.
    Usually they just put me in the mental ward... but my current belief is that there is no hard proof that the supernatural (intelligent force) exists (though I suspect it does). And there is no hard proof I am "special" and I'm worried about having delusions again so it causes me to act conservatively.

  2. Top | #32
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,934
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    31,147
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    During our last simulation operation meeting it was decided the excreationist function will be deletedd. It has become too erratic.
    Usually they just put me in the mental ward... but my current belief is that there is no hard proof that the supernatural (intelligent force) exists (though I suspect it does). And there is no hard proof I am "special" and I'm worried about having delusions again so it causes me to act conservatively.
    And away we go. How about we just talk about what those two terms mean?

    Supernatural: https://plato.stanford.edu/search/se...y=supernatural (155 documents found)

    intelligent force: https://plato.stanford.edu/search/se...elligent+force (1260 documents found)

    I tell you what. Why don't you, excreationist, scan these documents and report back which are appropriate for the current discussion.

    Think of me as a card catalog

  3. Top | #33
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    719
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,605
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    During our last simulation operation meeting it was decided the excreationist function will be deletedd. It has become too erratic.
    Usually they just put me in the mental ward... but my current belief is that there is no hard proof that the supernatural (intelligent force) exists (though I suspect it does). And there is no hard proof I am "special" and I'm worried about having delusions again so it causes me to act conservatively.
    And away we go. How about we just talk about what those two terms mean?

    Supernatural: https://plato.stanford.edu/search/se...y=supernatural (155 documents found)
    As far as "supernatural" goes...
    https://www.lifesplayer.com/bible.php
    "....I think all evidence of God and the paranormal can be explained by skeptics as coincidence, delusion, or hallucinations..."

    So those supernatural articles might all be irrelevant to my beliefs...

    intelligent force: https://plato.stanford.edu/search/se...elligent+force (1260 documents found)
    To find articles related to "intelligent force" quotes should be involved...
    https://plato.stanford.edu/search/se...igent+force%22
    And there is one result....

    I tell you what. Why don't you, excreationist, scan these documents and report back which are appropriate for the current discussion.

    Think of me as a card catalog
    I'd rather get to the point than try and bring in more vaguely relevant very lengthy documents for people to read....

  4. Top | #34
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,934
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    31,147
    Rep Power
    58
    OK so you aren't actually interested else you'd appreciate others who find ways to make sources easier to find.

    What mystifies me is how one gets to the point when one admits one is working with belief.

    I'm sure by your response here that you aren't interested in me holding forth on another "beauty of operationalism" preach.

  5. Top | #35
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    719
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,605
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    OK so you aren't actually interested else you'd appreciate others who find ways to make sources easier to find.
    I'm looking for sources relating the speed of light and time dilation to simulations. I'm not interested in very lengthy articles about the philosophy of the supernatural.

    What mystifies me is how one gets to the point when one admits one is working with belief.
    Well I think my experiences with an (apparent) intelligent force involves a belief...

    I'm sure by your response here that you aren't interested in me holding forth on another "beauty of operationalism" preach.
    Sorry I'm not familiar with that area of philosophy.

  6. Top | #36
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    12,934
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    31,147
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post

    Sorry I'm not familiar with that area of philosophy.
    Percy Williams Bridgman, Nobel prize winning physicist (1961), wrote the original paper on Operationalism in 1927. He wrote from the perspective of a physical scientist doing scientific work.

    From my perspective one can't understand entanglement unless one first understands the operations involved.

  7. Top | #37
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    719
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,605
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post

    Sorry I'm not familiar with that area of philosophy.
    Percy Williams Bridgman, Nobel prize winning physicist (1961), wrote the original paper on Operationalism in 1927. He wrote from the perspective of a physical scientist doing scientific work.

    From my perspective one can't understand entanglement unless one first understands the operations involved.
    I don't think quantum entanglement really supports the idea of a simulation very strongly.... if that's what you mean by "entanglement".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •