Slapping a mosquito to death is quite merciful. If however, you torture them, pull their legs off etc, you're either a psychopath or have no conception of the pain you're deliberately delivering to another creature.
Surgeons can practice on their cadavers in med school to their heart's content. As a science student who will never need to dissect a frog in real life, I'm real glad I wasn't responsible for the torture and murder of a sentient living creature.
Forgive me. I didn't know you were going down that path. This isn't philosophy where you argue about whether or not reality is "exists". We don't assume we're in the Matrix where every sensory input is treated only as a sensory input. How do you know there's a computing device in front of you? Have you touched it? Actually no - your skin just senses inputs from your fingers and your eyes are receiving light signals. You have no way of knowing whether or not you're really touching your computer. You also don't really know if you're wearing clothes or not. All you have is sensory inputs and no insight into "reality".
Pretending and playing with philosophy is fun. But no one really cares about academic epistemological problems here.
Have you touched x-rays? Have you felt them? How do you know they're not a mad made model that is coincidental with nature? Geez, I guess that means they don't exist. Just anthropomorphic fantasies after all. Omg, my world view just fell to pieces...
The next generation's advances can't come out of nowhere. They build on the progress of previous generations. Every scientist who has ever discovered anything realizes this.
Last I "heard", gravity was caused by the bending of the fabric of space time. In other words, there IS no gravity - you just move through space according to Newton's first law of motion...it's just that space is curved.
You got it backwards. Just read FB's press statement. They didn't say anything about not helping the government. Google on the other hand is the only company to have explicitly said that they won't censor controversial content.
Because PCs are too complex for most people to want to deal with
I can't wrap my head around the fact that I'm reading this on slashdot! You know, the place where nerds are supposed to hang out? A statement like this would get a geek crucified. What are you doing here?
The "therefore" part as you mentioned isn't the same that I was talking about. Yes - scientists certainly have a lot more going than that. I don't think I implied that was all they had to go on...:)
It's been proved alright. But yes - to understand it completely you need some pretty heavy theoretical knowledge/math skills. As with most things in science these days, it's not "blindly accepting" if you choose whom to believe based on their authenticity. So "blindly accepting" something when the overwhelming majority of qualified scientists back it is a very smart move. Without doing that, I would have to doubt everything from relativity to the formation of starts. I've never actually tested whether or not the speed of light is constant regardless of the frame of reference. But I "believe" it because enough qualified people say so after the Michelson Morley experiment.
So your best bet is to "just accept" it after seeing who says so and are they reliable, and are they independent and is there a consensus?
Because the Bell experiments destroyed that notion thoroughly....decades ago. It's not that we don't know. Reality takes a back seat until an observation takes place.
No - the puzzling nature of entaglement lies in the fact that until you measure it, no result has actually occurred - even for a single quantum experiment. So in this case, it's not as if one of the diamonds is secretly vibrating and we just don't know which one. As Bell's experiments have proved multiple times, there's no "hidden reality." The two diamonds really are vibrating and not vibrating at the same time.
Only when an observation is made, does the wave function "collapse" and only at that time does one of them actually vibrate or not vibrate. Till that observation however, they are neither...and they are both...for real!
Just to clarify - not being able to measure it doesn't mean there's an "underlying reality" which we haven't been able to observe. It's not that one of them really is vibrating and we just don't know which. They're both entagled meaning both of them are vibrating and not vibrating...or not.
That has already been proved. Why do I need to reproduce the proof on a slashdot post of all places? What you're talking about is the "deeper reality" theories which Einstein and a generation of physicists tried to figure out because quantum mechanics made them uncomfortable. We really shouldn't be having this discussion in the 21st century decades after the conclusive Bell experiments. Look up Wikipedia if you need to get more details.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is a law the same way that gravity is a law. Question it if you want. But then I also have the right to demand that you question gravity too.
You mean you have to keep believing the earth is the center of the universe. After all, who knows? One day we might find out that it's the center and our limited intelligence just can't see it right now.
No - it's the other way around. The burden of proof lies with the person claiming there's something out there we can't observer or record. This is why we say "Fairies don't exist." not "Fairies might exist."
So it's not for us to prove that "there's not more to the universe". It's for you to prove there is more. Till you prove there's more, there's nothing by default. Just like there are no fairies/leprechauns/unichorns/god/orbiting teacups by default until someone proves otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
So you tell me what they could have done to make you happy.
So if a looney reads what I write and goes on a rampage, I should be held responsible since that was the effect of my writing?
Slapping a mosquito to death is quite merciful. If however, you torture them, pull their legs off etc, you're either a psychopath or have no conception of the pain you're deliberately delivering to another creature.
Surgeons can practice on their cadavers in med school to their heart's content. As a science student who will never need to dissect a frog in real life, I'm real glad I wasn't responsible for the torture and murder of a sentient living creature.
iOS was attacked by Android first?
Forgive me. I didn't know you were going down that path. This isn't philosophy where you argue about whether or not reality is "exists". We don't assume we're in the Matrix where every sensory input is treated only as a sensory input. How do you know there's a computing device in front of you? Have you touched it? Actually no - your skin just senses inputs from your fingers and your eyes are receiving light signals. You have no way of knowing whether or not you're really touching your computer. You also don't really know if you're wearing clothes or not. All you have is sensory inputs and no insight into "reality".
Pretending and playing with philosophy is fun. But no one really cares about academic epistemological problems here.
Have you touched x-rays? Have you felt them? How do you know they're not a mad made model that is coincidental with nature? Geez, I guess that means they don't exist. Just anthropomorphic fantasies after all. Omg, my world view just fell to pieces...
The next generation's advances can't come out of nowhere. They build on the progress of previous generations. Every scientist who has ever discovered anything realizes this.
Last I "heard", gravity was caused by the bending of the fabric of space time. In other words, there IS no gravity - you just move through space according to Newton's first law of motion...it's just that space is curved.
But nice try.
Somewhat :)
Interesting. What are your views on reselling a CD which you bought legally then?
That's just legalese. This nonsense about "licensing" is just an excuse to prevent people from doing things with stuff they bought.
You got it backwards. Just read FB's press statement. They didn't say anything about not helping the government. Google on the other hand is the only company to have explicitly said that they won't censor controversial content.
Because PCs are too complex for most people to want to deal with
I can't wrap my head around the fact that I'm reading this on slashdot! You know, the place where nerds are supposed to hang out? A statement like this would get a geek crucified. What are you doing here?
The "therefore" part as you mentioned isn't the same that I was talking about. Yes - scientists certainly have a lot more going than that. I don't think I implied that was all they had to go on... :)
Wow - if that's what you call unfair, let's just shutter every major company on the planet.
Yes - the quarter is both heads and tails...and neither as well. And this has been proved...decades ago. Check out the Bell experiments for details.
It's been proved alright. But yes - to understand it completely you need some pretty heavy theoretical knowledge/math skills. As with most things in science these days, it's not "blindly accepting" if you choose whom to believe based on their authenticity. So "blindly accepting" something when the overwhelming majority of qualified scientists back it is a very smart move. Without doing that, I would have to doubt everything from relativity to the formation of starts. I've never actually tested whether or not the speed of light is constant regardless of the frame of reference. But I "believe" it because enough qualified people say so after the Michelson Morley experiment.
So your best bet is to "just accept" it after seeing who says so and are they reliable, and are they independent and is there a consensus?
Because the Bell experiments destroyed that notion thoroughly....decades ago. It's not that we don't know. Reality takes a back seat until an observation takes place.
No - the puzzling nature of entaglement lies in the fact that until you measure it, no result has actually occurred - even for a single quantum experiment. So in this case, it's not as if one of the diamonds is secretly vibrating and we just don't know which one. As Bell's experiments have proved multiple times, there's no "hidden reality." The two diamonds really are vibrating and not vibrating at the same time.
Only when an observation is made, does the wave function "collapse" and only at that time does one of them actually vibrate or not vibrate. Till that observation however, they are neither...and they are both...for real!
Just to clarify - not being able to measure it doesn't mean there's an "underlying reality" which we haven't been able to observe. It's not that one of them really is vibrating and we just don't know which. They're both entagled meaning both of them are vibrating and not vibrating...or not.
In this case, a woman can have an orgasm and not have it at the same time...since her state is intimately linked to the vibration of the device :D
That has already been proved. Why do I need to reproduce the proof on a slashdot post of all places? What you're talking about is the "deeper reality" theories which Einstein and a generation of physicists tried to figure out because quantum mechanics made them uncomfortable. We really shouldn't be having this discussion in the 21st century decades after the conclusive Bell experiments. Look up Wikipedia if you need to get more details.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is a law the same way that gravity is a law. Question it if you want. But then I also have the right to demand that you question gravity too.
You mean you have to keep believing the earth is the center of the universe. After all, who knows? One day we might find out that it's the center and our limited intelligence just can't see it right now.
No - it's the other way around. The burden of proof lies with the person claiming there's something out there we can't observer or record. This is why we say "Fairies don't exist." not "Fairies might exist."
So it's not for us to prove that "there's not more to the universe". It's for you to prove there is more. Till you prove there's more, there's nothing by default. Just like there are no fairies/leprechauns/unichorns/god/orbiting teacups by default until someone proves otherwise.