(1/2) the question. By your definition.

Here let me help you…..

"Present"

Err...no... can't see what you're driving at here?.....to quote again - from your own sig. this time - 'I'm a bit slow'...

Mind you, whether that's me being 'slow' or you, I shall leave others to decide....

 

Of course I believe... that's a fact; something that has been experimental proven beyond any doubt. I think there would be no transistors without that property.

But the question is: the fact that we can't know with 100% accuracy the position and momentum of a subatomic particle, doesn't mean that if we went back in time that particle would have the exact same position and momentum. What I'm trying to say is: even though the nature of quantum mechanics is probabilistic, and therefore we can't predicted it, it doesn't mean that each particle wasn't always meant to act as it does.

And besides... who said our brain makes "choices" based on the quantum randomness of it's subatomic particles?

 

Err...no... can't see what you're driving at here?.....to quote again - from your own sig. this time - 'I'm a bit slow'...

Mind you, whether that's me being 'slow' or you, I shall leave others to decide....

Did you not insist that "Present not Current" was as Reality exist?

There is no such thing as 'your current reality'.
There is just reality. That's where we all are, at present.

My choice to use Current and Reality together is a matter of choice and to do otherwise would alter my reality.

Are you maintaining your point or are you just molding it to suit you.

Are you avoiding the question all together. Picking and choosing ?

 

I've never seen anyone cross the road without looking and get whacked. But I've seen lots of people cross the road and not get whacked. So why don't we all -- or a very large fraction of us -- learn from our experiences and learn to cross the road without looking? After all, which should be the more powerful learning experience, having someone tell you that if you don't look both ways you'll get hit by a car, or seeing people time after time not looking both ways and yet not getting hit by a car.

Both. You seem to think that we learned X by studying X, but no. Everything we learn in a specific subject has an effect to everything we learn in totality. Say, you study Math, of course it has something with Science, right? Everything has relationship, and I am speaking in totality, with each other. You seem to think that only two, three can have relationship. NO. Everything in this world has relationship. Everything. What maybe nonsense for you is not nosnense for others. And a simple drops of rain can affect not only one, but the entire system. Right?

I would say that we choose what we learn all the time -- certainly not about everything, but about many things. I chose to learn about electrical engineering. I chose not to learn about ballet dancing.

But what makes you chose that kind of choosing? What makes you choose electrical engineering and ballet dancing? And if your answer is that I am exposed to these kind of stuffs. And I asked why? Because my parents are electrical engineers too. And I asked what causes them so? Because ahmm, my father's father wants him to be so. Why? Because ... and so on. it has lots of reasoning..... What we are today is the product of yesterday?

Frankly, sounds mostly like prattle and babble to me.

Sorry..... I thought every cause has an effect..................... And if so we have to trace back the very cause of everything.

I am not after determinism...~~ anyways~` im just being open minded~

 

The reason I lean towards the "no", is because I believe it's quite likely that our brain works like a computer -a highly advanced and complicated biological computer- and when this computer is feed the exact same variables to the exact same program, it has no choice but to come to the exact same conclusions.

The computer analogy points to the problems with the deterministic universe being a computer. It's very naive to think that computer solutions to problems are exact solutions in an imperfect world of impossible to obtain perfect information. Most complex computer problems like weather involve the interaction of millions or billions of data cells than can compound the air fluctuation of a butterfly into a major storm thousands of miles away. Even a completely deterministic nature in these systems does not make them capable of the predictable of future events. They only show one (assuming the hardware is perfect and software model is stable) possible outcome of many (many models) for the limited data for a limited time-frame. The problem some people have with a deterministic universe with predictable outcomes is that it seems to require involve 'super-natural' powers of perfection and instantaneous communication across the universe to stay on plan.

I prefer to think that we alter the universe with our actions and that we are responsible for those actions.

 

Did you not insist that "Present not Current" was as Reality exist?
My choice to use Current and Reality together is a matter of choice and to do otherwise would alter my reality.

Are you maintaining your point or are you just molding it to suit you.

Are you avoiding the question all together. Picking and choosing ?

Ah! .. I see what you mean now. So it was me being slow.

Doesn't change anything though....It doesn't matter whether you describe reality as being 'current' or 'present', that's just a minor semantic difference.
What you can't have is your current or (present) reality.
Your reality is the same as mine, and everyone else's... you don't get to pick a individual reality... although plenty of humans think they can....reality just 'is'.

And as I keep saying, you can't change or influence it.
What has been, is, and will be, is simply a continuation of a linear timeline ......which is compelled, by the laws of the universe (or at least this universe), to follow a pre-determined course.

 

Ah! .. I see what you mean now. So it was me being slow.Doesn't change anything though....

I don't think it's a matter of slow or fast, it's just cognition which is my thinking vs your own.

I would like to think that my implied version, means my timeline of reality is in a constant state of change, where as yours seems to be static when by your own admission (Free will does not exist)

In my reality I'm in a river of choices and variables, moving past you.

While you are stationary or your reality is frozen by your definition. Which allows you to skate around the issue.

as I keep saying, you can't change or influence it.
What has been, is, and will be, is simply a continuation of a linear timeline ......which is compelled, by the laws of the universe (or at least this universe), to follow a pre-determined course.

But, here you state that it is in flux or is linear suggesting movement?

Now, I'm the one not understanding, I would like to have my opinion changed if possible. Right now, I'm not convinced that my reality is not influenced by current.

 

The computer analogy points to the problems with the deterministic universe being a computer. It's very naive to think that computer solutions to problems are exact solutions in an imperfect world of impossible to obtain perfect information. Most complex computer problems like weather involve the interaction of millions or billions of data cells than can compound the air fluctuation of a butterfly into a major storm thousands of miles away. Even a completely deterministic nature in these systems does not make them predictable of future events. They only show one (assuming the hardware is perfect and software model is stable) possible outcome of many (many models) for the limited data for a limited time-frame. The problem some people have with a deterministic universe with predictable outcomes is that it seems to require involve 'super-natural' powers of perfection and instantaneous communication across the universe to stay on plan.

I prefer to think that we alter the universe with our actions and that we are responsible those actions.

Well, I don't really disagree with that; first, because I never said that we can predict someone's behavior with accuracy; and second, because I also never said that computers could ever predict such complex problems as the weather. I also never said, in regards to Wbahn's previous post, that the type of society I'm thinking about would be perfect; just a hell of a lot better by simply providing a healthier environment for everyone.

What I did say is that we, as well as computers, make decisions based on the information we have; change the information, and in both cases you will change the result; keep it all the same, and the result must also be the same.

 

In my reality I'm in a river of choices and variables, moving past you.

While you are stationary or your reality is frozen by your definition. Which allows you to skate around the issue.

But, here you state that it is in flux or is linear suggesting movement?

Your reality ---or at least your perception of reality -- is the same as my reality. It is simply seen from a different viewpoint.

In our particular universe (and there may an infinite number of other universes?) time seems to move 'forward', as far as we are concerned.
So we think of past, present, and future in relation to that 'timeline'. The 'motion', if you will, is linear, from past - through present - towards the future.

Seeing things in that way is a limitation of human intelligence. In truth, everything in this universe (and maybe others?) is not subject to this oversimplified 2 dimensional concept of 'time'.
Seen from an alternative perspective, what is our past, present, and future may not be seen in the same way.
My contention is that it is all already 'out there' .. everything!

We simply happen to be passing through in this dimension, and see things as either having happened - are happening now - or are yet to happen.

It's not like that... and that's why we can't change anything.... even if some of us are confident enough of our own importance to think we can....

Einstein turned the accepted wisdom of Newtonian physics on it's head .. and I'm willing to bet that most of us do not understand all of what he tried to explain in his Theory of Relativity. And that's just the tip of the iceberg!


Take for example, the concept that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light:
If I'm on a particle of light, travelling, at the speed of light, away from another particle of light, also travelling at the speed of light , but in the opposite direction, then surely they are moving away from each other at twice the speed of light?
That's not true, apparently, but I cannot get my head round why...... and that's just a simple example.

On a cosmic level, I think human intelligence is probably listed somewhere near the bottom of the heap.
I also think it is just arrogant of us to think we can control or change the 'flow' of time - or what occurs at any one moment of that time - in any way.....
We're way out of our depth here....we're just not always ready to concede that point...

 

In my reality I'm in a river of choices and variables, moving past you.

While you are stationary or your reality is frozen by your definition. Which allows you to skate around the issue.

Whether we believe in free will or not, we all experience choices in the same way; we are all conscious that our decisions will affect our future; and we all think we are in control of what we are about to do next.

We are not saying that we can just send everything to hell just because we are confident that whatever was meant to happen will happen anyway; we still need to try and make the best out of each situation and plan for the future.

But whatever we decide, that's what was meant to be from the beginning of times; which is different from destiny, fate, karma, predestination, or any of those things.

We do make our future, but that future was always meant to be as it will be... again, because we could have not changed it with our choices.

 

If I'm on a particle of light, travelling, at the speed of light, away from another particle of light, also travelling at the speed of light , but in the opposite direction, then surely they are moving away from each other at twice the speed of light?

I'm not sure if you know about this yet or what implication it could have on your theory?

Speed of Light /CERN

 

Actually that was an experimental error, the article you link to is quite old.

At the speed of light the concept of time does not exist. Everything is in the ever present "now". So, to a photon, speed is also a meaningless concept, since speed is defined by distance / time .

 

Take for example, the concept that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light:

I also think it is just arrogant of us to think we can control or change the 'flow' of time - or what occurs at any one moment of that time - in any way.....
We're way out of our depth here....we're just not always ready to concede that point...

I think we can control our universe (free will) on a local scale because the rate of change in the universe is limited and choice as we see it is generated by that limitation as we all view the same events differently because we are in different time-frames to events. Classical mechanics assumes no speed limit on any possible interaction but we know that's not the case because we have electrodynamics that depends on it so maybe there are also (general relativity/quantum type) limitations on past events influencing future events. At some complexity of the consciousness scale the limits of determinism start to kick in (the precision and volume of information needed is missing) and limit it's influence on future events.

 

I think we can control our universe (free will) on a local scale because the rate of change in the universe is limited

We perceive it as limited, in our transition through 'time' as we understand it.
As Bill points out in his post, at the speed of light there is no limitation of rate of change. Everything is now 'present'.

Those that understand the concepts of quantum mechanics - and let's face it, there aren't that many folk who do! -- are continually telling us that, even though our understanding improves all the time (no pun intended), there are still huge holes in our knowledge.
Where, for example, is all the missing Dark Matter?.. What is all the missing Dark Matter!... and this is just in our universe!

No, sorry, I think an understanding of the actual reality of our universe is still way above our heads... and I personally feel we can't influence anything, during our 'transit' through this particular dimension.
I do understand that cleverer folk than me really do believe that we can control things.
But in truth, even they are only guessing......

 

I found an experiment that summarizes everything I've been saying here.

You really need to read this article and watch the video with the experiment.

Brain Scans Can Reveal Your Decisions 7 Seconds Before You “Decide”

 

Take for example, the concept that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light:
If I'm on a particle of light, travelling, at the speed of light, away from another particle of light, also travelling at the speed of light , but in the opposite direction, then surely they are moving away from each other at twice the speed of light?
That's not true, apparently, but I cannot get my head round why...... and that's just a simple example.

Have you read the book Einstein himself wrote on this? It's actually quite readable and easy to follow the reasoning and development of special relativity.

 

Have you read the book Einstein himself wrote on this? It's actually quite readable and easy to follow the reasoning and development of special relativity.

No -but I have just now looked at this site: http://www.einstein-online.info/

and that looks to be 'readable' --- whether it will still hurt my brain is another matter

So thanks for the suggestion...

 

I found an experiment that summarizes everything I've been saying here.

You really need to read this article and watch the video with the experiment.

Brain Scans Can Reveal Your Decisions 7 Seconds Before You “Decide”

That's excellent ....De Sautoy (who appears quite a lot on UK tv) seems genuinally shocked.

Of course I'm not... it's really like just saying 'told you so!'

 

That's excellent ....De Sautoy (who appears quite a lot on UK tv) seems genuinally shocked.

Of course I'm not... it's really like just saying 'told you so!'

I was surprised; but not because of what the experiment showed, which I already suspected for years. It was because I was only looking for proof that our subconscious was aware of our decisions before our conscious -which I had read elsewhere-; so I was surprised to find everything I was trying to prove in one single source.

 

Now thats interesting. I think I know what my problem in life has alway's been

So, if my subconscious is doing the thinking I know what to blame for my "Teenage" years.

Why, did you do that? I don't know why, it just came to me I know I think I'll do the opposite.

This sort of reminds me of George Costanza……...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUvKE3bQlY