“The Infinite Improbability Drive is a wonderful new method of crossing vast interstellar distances in a mere nothingth of a second, without all that tedious mucking about in hyperspace. It was discovered by a lucky chance, and then developed into a governable form of propulsion by the Galactic Government's research team on Damogran. This, briefly, is the story of its discovery. The principle of generating small amounts of finite improbability by simply hooking the logic circuits of a Bambleweeny 57 SubMeson Brain to an atomic vector plotter suspended in a strong Brownian Motion producer (say a nice hot cup of tea) were of course well understood - and such generators were often used to break the ice at parties by making all the molecules in the hostess's undergarments leap simultaneously one foot to the left, in accordance with the Theory of Indeterminacy. Many respectable physicists said that they weren't going to stand for this - partly because it was a debasement of science, but mostly because they didn't get invited to those sort of parties. Another thing they couldn't stand was the perpetual failure they encountered in trying to construct a machine which could generate the infinite improbability field needed to[…]”
A man from the future once told me that our sun makes our Physics through synthesizing the type of light we consume every day. And that Quantum Physics is actually "physical artefacting produced by light looking at itself".
He spoke more on the phenomena when "light looks at itself" it creates this energy mapping loop that tells the Sun the Time. And when the loop is completed, it triggers the sun's inner processes to advance its state towards other possible futures. Meaning, actually making changes to the fundamental nature of the wave functions before they collapse.
Something like your 'Meta-Time' concept?
We couldn't speak for long, he had some really important thing in his past to get back to.
There are many spiritual practitioners that currently travel in spaces that can be defined as "The Multiverse." I met this man in particular while on my Buddhist practice.
Hope you are well Thoryx - thank you for this! There's some interesting work on whether information is the basic unit of the universe, whether the whole universe itself has been intelligence-directed, which would resonate with the idea of 'physical artefacting produced by light looking at itself'. Beautiful book called When We Cease to Understand the World that I think you'd enjoy - it's an account of some of the quantum physicists and their experiences making their discoveries.
Thanks so much! I had a look at the preview, it sounds intense! I'd love to check that out! If you get an opportunity to check out some Buddhist Practice as well. I'd love to know what you think of the experience. (Meditative) 😇🙏🏾🪽
i think you're completely correct that the most sensible similarity relation between possible worlds (whatever its precise details turn out to be) should turn on some way of summing/averaging everyone's subjective experiences of the differences between the two. there are some fairly obvious counter-examples, as there are more generally to this type of anthropocentric philosophy, but they've never bothered me too much :) i suppose there's an interesting question about whether it should about actually or possibly perceivable differences (if something were very different in a far away star system for example), and i lean towards the latter (what if something random suddenly changed which meant we would perceive so many more differences -- it would make our previous assertions of similarity false, though maybe you don't mind that), though you do end up losing some of what you want from it then, i think
interesting - I like that difference between actual vs possibly perceivable differences, although it's an interesting way that blends layers of possibility on top of one another.
Part of me is thinking about how does it work if we frame all of ethical discourse really explicitly in terms of possible worlds - if something like phronesis is thought of as your ability to make fine-grained distinctions between worlds, if Kantian thinking is thought of as moving in a possible world ordering towards the kingdom of ends ...?
“The Infinite Improbability Drive is a wonderful new method of crossing vast interstellar distances in a mere nothingth of a second, without all that tedious mucking about in hyperspace. It was discovered by a lucky chance, and then developed into a governable form of propulsion by the Galactic Government's research team on Damogran. This, briefly, is the story of its discovery. The principle of generating small amounts of finite improbability by simply hooking the logic circuits of a Bambleweeny 57 SubMeson Brain to an atomic vector plotter suspended in a strong Brownian Motion producer (say a nice hot cup of tea) were of course well understood - and such generators were often used to break the ice at parties by making all the molecules in the hostess's undergarments leap simultaneously one foot to the left, in accordance with the Theory of Indeterminacy. Many respectable physicists said that they weren't going to stand for this - partly because it was a debasement of science, but mostly because they didn't get invited to those sort of parties. Another thing they couldn't stand was the perpetual failure they encountered in trying to construct a machine which could generate the infinite improbability field needed to[…]”
Excerpt From
The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy
Douglas Adams
https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewBook?id=0
This material may be protected by copyright.
Montaigne — apology for Raymond Seybond
A man from the future once told me that our sun makes our Physics through synthesizing the type of light we consume every day. And that Quantum Physics is actually "physical artefacting produced by light looking at itself".
He spoke more on the phenomena when "light looks at itself" it creates this energy mapping loop that tells the Sun the Time. And when the loop is completed, it triggers the sun's inner processes to advance its state towards other possible futures. Meaning, actually making changes to the fundamental nature of the wave functions before they collapse.
Something like your 'Meta-Time' concept?
We couldn't speak for long, he had some really important thing in his past to get back to.
There are many spiritual practitioners that currently travel in spaces that can be defined as "The Multiverse." I met this man in particular while on my Buddhist practice.
Safe travels.
🙏🏾
Hope you are well Thoryx - thank you for this! There's some interesting work on whether information is the basic unit of the universe, whether the whole universe itself has been intelligence-directed, which would resonate with the idea of 'physical artefacting produced by light looking at itself'. Beautiful book called When We Cease to Understand the World that I think you'd enjoy - it's an account of some of the quantum physicists and their experiences making their discoveries.
Thanks so much! I had a look at the preview, it sounds intense! I'd love to check that out! If you get an opportunity to check out some Buddhist Practice as well. I'd love to know what you think of the experience. (Meditative) 😇🙏🏾🪽
i think you're completely correct that the most sensible similarity relation between possible worlds (whatever its precise details turn out to be) should turn on some way of summing/averaging everyone's subjective experiences of the differences between the two. there are some fairly obvious counter-examples, as there are more generally to this type of anthropocentric philosophy, but they've never bothered me too much :) i suppose there's an interesting question about whether it should about actually or possibly perceivable differences (if something were very different in a far away star system for example), and i lean towards the latter (what if something random suddenly changed which meant we would perceive so many more differences -- it would make our previous assertions of similarity false, though maybe you don't mind that), though you do end up losing some of what you want from it then, i think
interesting - I like that difference between actual vs possibly perceivable differences, although it's an interesting way that blends layers of possibility on top of one another.
Part of me is thinking about how does it work if we frame all of ethical discourse really explicitly in terms of possible worlds - if something like phronesis is thought of as your ability to make fine-grained distinctions between worlds, if Kantian thinking is thought of as moving in a possible world ordering towards the kingdom of ends ...?