The real application would be for transporting freight, not passengers.
What would have been a 14 hour transpacific flight is 6 days in a zeppelin
Making it comparable to a ship (albeit at much greater cost), but a ship can only go seaport to seaport while a solar zeppelin could potentially go anywhere to anywhere.
Quantum randomness is a proven physical fact. That you can only relate it to some trivial philosophical concept understands makes no difference, except when it comes to making a fool of yourself.
If you use radioactive decay for the seed, then it is guaranteed by quantum mechanics that the seed is truly random. The underlying physics has been tested tens of thousands of times and has always led to the same conclusion: randomness really exists.
It is great to think that we are in control of it, and sucks if we are not.
That is the whole problem with this nonsense: thinking that there is a "we" that is somehow divorced from the control mechanism. We are our brains and all they do.
But recent science says that we do not make conscious decisions. They are made subconsciously, with the conscious merely inventing post-hoc plausible explanations for why that decision has been made, if called on to do so.
Unfortunately, there is no clear distinction betwee "conscious" or "unconscious" thought, making that conclusion nonsensical rubbish. Par for the course for so-called "Social Science".
This is a really hard problem. Tests like the one in this study do not determine whether or not there is free will, but it's easy to grab attention by claiming that they do, and this is why such claims are made.
Einsteins's big discovery was not the Lorentz transform (which was, obviously, named after Lorentz for a reason as he discovered it much earlier) but the realisation that appearances (things appear to shrink, clocks appear to tick more slowly, clocks appear to be out of sync) are actually real.
Again, none of this has anything to do with "time going backwards". The claim that "all reference frames are equally valid" is meaningless, since "validity" is a philosophical concept that has nothing to do with physics.
Relativistic effects are not "apparent", they are real. If one of two twin brothers flies away at high speed and then comes back, he really will have aged less.
Which has absolutely nothing to do with "time going backwards".
Assume that I am "A". If I send a message to "B", then my reference frame is indeed "preferred" since the only concern regarding "time going backwards" is whether I received a reply from B before I send the original message.
It doesn't matter a damn how B or C perceive the event. Since I sent the message, it is my perception, and mine alone, that matters.
Slashdot Mirror
All those people WILL find something to do
Sure they will.
They'll sell crack, mug people, run human trafficking rings, etc. The possibilities are endless!
Because she was rich.
He actually slept with her secretary.
Its in progress, and will be delivered in July.
Then report it in July.
Until then, only the highest degree of skepticism is justified.
And include VR.
And be 3D printed.
And be sold by Elon Musk.
What would have been a 14 hour transpacific flight is 6 days in a zeppelin
Making it comparable to a ship (albeit at much greater cost), but a ship can only go seaport to seaport while a solar zeppelin could potentially go anywhere to anywhere.
if you don't agree with everything I said, then I will issue infantile insults until I feel better. So Nyah!
Everyone adjusted and there wasn't a 'basic income' needed.
Visited Detroit lately?
all of these companies who have no employees will have no one to sell their products to because no one will have any money to buy them
The 1%ers will always have plentry of money to buy goodies, and businesses in the future will reorganize to serve their needs exclusively.
and think something like happy happy sad happy sad to convey states which we are incapable of understanding.
Or Darmok and Jalad on Tanagra?
Needless to say, this conclusion is stupid.
FTFY.
Predictable, theoretically.
True according to nineteenth century physics. Completely false according to modern physics.
You need to read more physics and less philosophy.
and everything and anything else touching on it were determined to happen from the instant of the big bang and beyond
Welcome to the nineteenth century!
The "clockwork universe" that you describe has been thoroughly debunked by twentieth century physics.
Quantum randomness is a god of the gaps argument. A form of the argument from ignorance fallacy.
Well, you clearly are an expert on ignorance and fallacy.
Quantum randomness is a proven physical fact.
That you can only relate it to some trivial philosophical concept understands makes no difference, except when it comes to making a fool of yourself.
If you use radioactive decay for the seed, then it is guaranteed by quantum mechanics that the seed is truly random.
The underlying physics has been tested tens of thousands of times and has always led to the same conclusion: randomness really exists.
It is great to think that we are in control of it, and sucks if we are not.
That is the whole problem with this nonsense: thinking that there is a "we" that is somehow divorced from the control mechanism. We are our brains and all they do.
I would say that "me" is a part of your brain.
Then get the hell out of my brain!
But recent science says that we do not make conscious decisions. They are made subconsciously, with the conscious merely inventing post-hoc plausible explanations for why that decision has been made, if called on to do so.
Unfortunately, there is no clear distinction betwee "conscious" or "unconscious" thought, making that conclusion nonsensical rubbish.
Par for the course for so-called "Social Science".
This is a really hard problem. Tests like the one in this study do not determine whether or not there is free will, but it's easy to grab attention by claiming that they do, and this is why such claims are made.
Very well said.
"Free will" is just a term we use to describe the as yet unknown mechanism that connects consciousness, decision, action and result.
Free will is most definitely an illusion, and consciousness is not what you think it is. It's more akin to a sense than anything
Define these terms, in a clear and unambiguous manner. i.e. with no hand-waving:
"Consciousness"
"Illusion"
"Sense"
Didn't think you could. You're blowing smoke out of your ass.
In other news:
Studies show that "Social Science" is a contradiction in terms.
I used to think this was an option too, but the more I read about it, the more it became obvious that it wouldn't work
But according to the article, Captain Kirk says it would! So that's that.
Einsteins's big discovery was not the Lorentz transform (which was, obviously, named after Lorentz for a reason as he discovered it much earlier) but the realisation that appearances (things appear to shrink, clocks appear to tick more slowly, clocks appear to be out of sync) are actually real.
Again, none of this has anything to do with "time going backwards".
The claim that "all reference frames are equally valid" is meaningless, since "validity" is a philosophical concept that has nothing to do with physics.
Relativistic effects are not "apparent", they are real. If one of two twin brothers flies away at high speed and then comes back, he really will have aged less.
Which has absolutely nothing to do with "time going backwards".
Assume that I am "A". If I send a message to "B", then my reference frame is indeed "preferred" since the only concern regarding
"time going backwards" is whether I received a reply from B before I send the original message.
It doesn't matter a damn how B or C perceive the event. Since I sent the message, it is my perception, and mine alone, that matters.