Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / My theory (non game related)

Author
Message
flibX0r
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Feb 2003
Location: Western Australia
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 14:13
http://www.freewebs.com/jellystudios/

I'm wondering what people think about it. I warn you though, its kind of depressing.

And please, don't bring religion into this. I am a man (well, teen) of science and don't wan't to talk about that.

Current Project: Interactive DBPro Showcase Example
Project Status: Game Engine 90%
http://www.w3th.tk <-- Soon to have some content
jrowe
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Oct 2002
Location: Here
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 14:41
I've known and beliived for a long time that the future is set but that's not a bad thing, what are we if not the sum of our experiences and genes? Nothing. You do still have choice even if it is only an illusion.


For Fathers and Sons who enjoy wholy spirits.
Pincho Paxton
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 15:34
Actually, things are way too chaotic to predict, so it makes no difference whether they are meant to happen or not. Look at the Lotto, it's way simpler to predict the Lotto than it is to predict a few particles passing you by. Also, evolution has given us a brain that uses the subconcious to make alternate decisions on everything we do. Take a game of chess for example, you make a move, but your subconcious works out all the other moves that you could have made. You don't realise that it is doing this, but it does. Why would evolution bother with this system if everything were preditermined? We wouldn't need choices, just the final outcome.

No I don't think we can go back in time, just forward, same as you said.

Pincho.

BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 16:43
If the future is set, why would I post here?
Or was that set?
And if it was, so was your theory, so in that case it's not your theory because it was destined to exist before you thought of it.

So to summarise, that would mean I was always destined to post my disbelief of the future being set before you thought of your theory which in fact already existed, and because you didn't know your theory existed and you would think you had created it, it all becomes irrelevant because that proves that we will never know if the future is set.

Thank You.

BatVink (formerly StevieVee)
http://facepaint.me.uk/catalog/default.php
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 17:27 Edited at: 6th Apr 2004 17:28
on the terms of time travel...

ok lets say you go faster then the speed of light away from earth(in a space ship)...and look back at the earth...you would start seeing light from the past...and if you had a strong enough telescope you could see right onto the earth...seeing the light that is right in front of your face but not seeing the light that is just now really leaving the earth...so you would be seeing into the past... but if you start going back to the earth you would just end up back in the current time... so you can see into the past (if you have a freaking good spaceship ...and telescope...) but not travel into the past...

not sure about forward time travel

"Your wife is death. How? NO idea. But it is murder. REVENGE!!!!!!!!!"
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 17:42
It may be that the future is set, but with the vast number of variables affecting the outcome of every event, it simply isn't predictable to us. which means that as far as we are concerned the future may as well be random.

*** Coming soon - Network Plug-in - Check my site for info ***
For free Plug-ins, source and the Interface library for Visual C++ 6, .NET and now for Dev-C++ http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 17:50 Edited at: 8th Apr 2004 07:49
Quote: "ok lets say you go faster then the speed of light away from earth"


That's not possible. Mass changes in respect to velocity and as you get closer to the speed of light, your mass goes up meaning you'd need a stronger supply of energy. If you were going at the speed of light then you'd have an infinite mass and therefore need an infinty amount of energy to move you, which is of course non-existant.

Most people just continue with the "but what-if" scenarios but with physics you simply cannot say that. If you ignore one law then that would modify the other laws making it unanwserable with our current knowledge of physics. This is best explained with an analogy, if you have a graph with an asymptote (means the graph never touches the line, it just gets infinitely close) like the following:

Edit: Now why would an education site disallow hotlinking?
Edit 2: Link removed completely.

Let's assume the red dotted line asymptotes are -1 and 6, if you asked me "what if the graph DID intersect that red line at -1, what would the y coordinate be? It's unanwserable because it simply cannot intercept that line. It's impossible.

Hope you get what I'm saying.


"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 17:55 Edited at: 6th Apr 2004 17:55
yes i get what you are saying but i was just saying ..."even if we could go the speed of light then this is all we could achieve"...
i understand that it's impossible...

"Your wife is death. How? NO idea. But it is murder. REVENGE!!!!!!!!!"
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 18:22
Oh, the human mind, how weak it is, confined within the restraints of what it knows.

Most major inventions and concepts were discovered by accident, or as the result of an accident (Mass, Relativity, plastic, atomic power to name but a few). Even "new" inventions are an accumulation of what we already know. If only we could live outside the box...

BatVink (formerly StevieVee)
http://facepaint.me.uk/catalog/default.php
Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 19:37
well, Mr Flibble, I have a new-found respect for you, and even though I'm failing science, English, Math, and Social Studies...um....yeah, I can see things from your point of view, and it wouldn't mean a fifth dimension, a fourth. I though do believe in God, and not in evolution or any of that witchcraft (j/k about the witchcraft part.)

You're just jealous cuz the voices don't talk to you!!!
Powersoft
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Aug 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 19:48
i think you can only go faster than the speed of light or the same speed if you have an infinite mass, which is impossible

Just to add to the confusion.
Look at my avatar
Teh Go0rfmeister
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 20:00
whats the point of life if we dont have crontrol over it?

http://www.tinnedhead.tk under re-construction.
Pincho Paxton
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 20:32
Well, you have no control over yesterday but you wouldn't want to erase your entire history would you?

Douglass
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 21:03
hey it relates to time travel...
http://www.johntitor.com

andrew11
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 21:03 Edited at: 6th Apr 2004 21:07
I agree with the first theory. I thought about that for a long time. One particle could change your life. I dont agree that time travel is not possible though. I guess im just hoping I can do it one day . Although, time travel would then have to disprove the first theory, because if we had no control over anything, then the same outcome would happen no matter what because the particles are the same. I figure, the best thing to do is not think about it too much because then youll hurt your head

Of course, then theres the other possibility, that non of its true, and we live in the matrix. lol

@Doug
I was just thinking about that before you posted.

"All programmers are playwrites and all computers are lousy actors" -Anon
TheAbomb12
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2003
Location: Amist the blue skies...
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 21:59 Edited at: 6th Apr 2004 22:10
WOW just WOW...


I had the VERY same theory as well; except my theory dosent mention particles, just "cause and effect" of the universe.

I too feel that beings have no true "Freewill". And even thought we appear to be making choices, there really is no way we can choose how our life is; even our attitude and thoughts are not under our control. These Items are directlly influnced by outside factors. And those outside factors are effects of other factors; and so on , and so on.

Unforunally, this theory has one flaw. Infinite regress is almost impossible to overcome; that is, what is the very first Cause of the universe. The amount of effects is equal to infinity, however the amount of causes are finite (yet this a extreamlly high number). However, if there where some "being" that could know what the first cause ever was, he could perdict the future. Of course this being could be interpreted as a "God" of some sort with infinite knowledge, but Ill leave that for someone else.

[edit]I didn't read your entire theory the first time but I noticed you have a section about infinite regress as well.[/edit]

Wow, I am amazed of how we both thought the VERY same basic thing about "Fate". (Great Minds Think alike )

Amist the Blue Skies...
Scraggle
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jul 2003
Location: Yorkshire
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 22:54
You agree with the well known fact that matter cannot be created or destroyed.

You say the 'Big Bang' is the exception to the rule

You go on to say that you believe that it was another universe collapsing into a single point before becoming our universe. If that is the case (which, incidently is also my opinion) then the 'Bing Bang' is not the exception to the rule because the matter existed before the bang, was condensed into a single point and then expanded again to become our universe.
Nothing lost, nothing gained. Simply condensed and expanded.

Pointing out the 'error' in you theory is not meant as a critisism because I agree with it. All I mean to do is point out to you that the only thing that you believe to be wrong with your theory - is not wrong at all.

AnDrEy
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jan 2004
Location: In Da Club
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 23:15
If you had travelled in time backwards say 10 years and screwed the world over then when the world you travelled to reaches the present you had when you left you would not travel back in time to screw the world over because in the present (of the screwed over world) you could not do that, then 10 years back the world does not get screwed over so in 10 years when the present of the not-screwed over world reaches the time you theorectically time-treavelled you will time travel again from a not-screwed over world to screw over the world 10 years back- Its a repeating cycle with the world being screwed over half of the time
Complicated isn't it?

00-----====JaCkPoT====-----00
Scraggle
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jul 2003
Location: Yorkshire
Posted: 6th Apr 2004 23:49 Edited at: 6th Apr 2004 23:54
Quote: "Complicated isn't it?"

No, it's nonsense!

On the subject of time travel it is possible to travel back and forth through time, although different methods are used for each.

To travel forward in time all you have to do is .... exist! What do you know? I am currently travelling forward in time at the steady rate of 1s/s (1 second per second).

To travel backward in time is less interactive. It is called memory. Just close your eyes and travel back to happy times.

As for travelling faster than light. Using off the shelf equipment at a cost of $500 you can send signal at upto four times the speed of light! Don't believe me? Read it for yourself http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992796



1001001 S.O.S.
Emperor Baal
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Dec 2003
Location: The Netherlands - Oudenbosch
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 00:02
Well, travelling faster than light has its consequences.

If you are travelling faster, than you would be broken into constituant sub-atomic particles. And thats also evidence the for law of conservation of energy. (That would be painful )

Quote: "
UPDATED

Amd 2800+ 1024mb pc3200 A7N8X - Deluxe Ati Radeon 9800PRO 256mb
"
TheAbomb12
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2003
Location: Amist the blue skies...
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 01:26
If someone was to know the Prime (first) cause of the universe we would be able to "see" into the future as well as recall what occurs into the past. (however, they wouldn't be able to physically travel backwards through time.)

This is due Mr Flibble and my own theories about causation, and that there are no "random" events. If you know the first cause, you know all causes and effects...

Amist the Blue Skies...
flibX0r
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Feb 2003
Location: Western Australia
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 13:21 Edited at: 7th Apr 2004 13:24
w00t! 21 relies in a day. Not bad.

@Scraggle

Yeah, i should fix that. I wrote that out a while ago and have had thoughts about the big bang. The prior universe collapsing concept actually makes sense on a lot of levels when you think about it.

And for that article about faster than light signals...

Quote: "While the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon.

Signals also get weaker and more distorted the faster they go, so in theory no useful information can get transmitted at faster-than-light speeds, though Robertson hopes his students and others can now rigorously and cheaply test those ideas. "



@Mr X

Yeah, it would be a 5th dimension. Time is the fourth dimension, and going back and forth in this dimension implies time travel. The universe is slowly moving along this dimension, but when you go faster you move slower along this dimension.

What i meant about a 5th dimension is multiple time dimensions. You can't have 2 times on the same timeline, so the 5th dimension would be the ability to have multiple times. It's like when you plot a 2d graph. A true function cannot have 2 y values for the same x value, but if you move along the x axis, then you can different y values.


@AnDrEy

Yeah, if you look at the bottom of THIS--> http://www.freewebs.com/jellystudios/index.html<--- page you can see that i describe exactly what you just said. Its called a paradox, and as far as we know, the physical laws of the universe do not allow paradoxes, and thus backwards time travel is not possible.

Current Project: Interactive DBPro Showcase Example
Project Status: Game Engine 90%
http://www.w3th.tk <-- Soon to have some content
AnDrEy
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jan 2004
Location: In Da Club
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 13:30 Edited at: 7th Apr 2004 13:33
No you said not possible, I said possible but half the time you do not need to go back in time and half the time there is chaos (depending on what happened)(I might be very wrong though)

Wow if they actually manage to perfect the tecnology (faster than light) they can send digital 10101010 signals for a receiver yeasterday and you can have tomorrows news today. (even if digital signals get distorted they are fairly easy to put back together within a certain degree of clarity) I can just imagine what Osama bin laden would think of that

las6
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Sep 2002
Location: Finland
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 14:28
You guys might like the new movie "Butterfly Effect"... but then again you might ruin the experience for yourself by starting to think about the theories behind it.

It was suprisingly good movie, although a bit heavy towards the end.. and the end was somewhat a letdown for me.


<<free textures. || Keyboard not detected. Press F1 to continue.
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 19:37
doug- that link is really spooky i guess the only way we'll know he was really a time traveller is if civil war breaks out in 2005

"Your wife is death. How? NO idea. But it is murder. REVENGE!!!!!!!!!"
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 22:41
@Exeat, your link to that GIF appears to have excited someone from that site - The image is copyrighted, so can you remove it please?

*** Coming soon - Network Plug-in - Check my site for info ***
For free Plug-ins, source and the Interface library for Visual C++ 6, .NET and now for Dev-C++ http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
FROGGIE!
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Oct 2003
Location: in front of my computer
Posted: 7th Apr 2004 22:47 Edited at: 7th Apr 2004 22:57
There is a 5th and a 6th dimension. if there wasn't then string theory wouldn't work.

Also there are odds of almost infinite to 1 against time travel. all massless particles ARE or CAN travel at the speed of light - the only problem is we will never be able to see them because they have no mass. as for moving particles with mass the only thing that we can use that travels as fast as the speed of light is light itself. There are currently experements to see if light can bend space into a vortex and move matter. The only problem with that though is that this matter will be subjected to spaghetti theory, and also that you will only be able to travel backwards in time to the point where the first vortex was created.

my games are only as good as the people who play them...
so if my game is crap then its your f******g fault!
Mentor
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 00:17
quantum effects are large enough to alter the results of nuerons firing in the brain, so a small percentage of all that people do is based on unpredictable random quantum effects (maybe even from some particle in the quantum foam that triggered an event), so the future is created by us and is unfixed, since it depends partly on the actions of all the people and events around us, some of which are caused by purely random quantum events or chaotic effects that cascade.
So the future is random and we have awareness that allows us to try and alter the events around us even when we feel they are trying to force us into some predetermined path, just one man could start a war, just one man could save the lives of millions, there is no need to adopt a nihlist philosophy, we do have free will, life is anti-entropic, the universe wants to reduce it`self to uniform thermal noise, life keeps making order out of bits of the universe against the nature of energy, thats free will.

(ah! teenage mood swings...I remember them well, when I could see all the universe in a grain of sand and I thought I alone had just come up with some fantastic theory, until I found some Greek, Roman or 18th century writer had got there first ... I just never had heard of them until I mentioned it to my teachers )

I have this theory that ID are waiting for patch 6 so that they can finish Doom III, any takers

Mentor.

PS this may be drivel...I`m on my 4th glass of scotch

PC1: P4 hyperthreading 3ghz, 1gig mem, 2x160gig hd`s, ATI radeon 9800 pro gfx, 6 way surround sound, PC2: AMD 1.2ghz, 512mb ram, FX5200 ultra gfx, stereo 16 bit soundblaster, ups.
Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 00:34
wow Mentor, scotch is some strong stuff, diluting it?

I doubt thay're waiting for patch 6, you must be druk

You're just jealous cuz the voices don't talk to you!!!
TheAbomb12
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2003
Location: Amist the blue skies...
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 01:09 Edited at: 8th Apr 2004 01:15
Quote: "quantum effects are large enough to alter the results of nuerons firing in the brain, so a small percentage of all that people do is based on unpredictable random quantum effects (maybe even from some particle in the quantum foam that triggered an event), so the future is created by us and is unfixed, since it depends partly on the actions of all the people and events around us, some of which are caused by purely random quantum events or chaotic effects that cascade."


It may appear to be random and unpredictiple (as it very well may be), but is it really really random? For instance, If everything in the universe travelled backwards through time right before a specific quantum event, would that event be the same as it was the first time?

I would assume it would be...

Quote: "So the future is random and we have awareness that allows us to try and alter the events around us even when we feel they are trying to force us into some predetermined path, just one man could start a war, just one man could save the lives of millions, there is no need to adopt a nihlist philosophy, we do have free will, life is anti-entropic, the universe wants to reduce it`self to uniform thermal noise, life keeps making order out of bits of the universe against the nature of energy, thats free will."


Awareness? What is our awarness based off of? Our observations, right? So could you say we are reacting to the enviroment? Thus we are reacting to causes and effect throughout the universe. Even our attitudes are reaction caused by outside effects.

A man CAN start a war; but what motivates this man to start a war? Maybe its an Attitude that he has towards a certain group of people. But what motivated him to feel that way? was it his own dissision to hate a group of people?

Maybe it was the effect of his parents who told him that the group of people where filthy and rotten. Or maybe it was the affect of that man having too much power.. etc etc...

So you can say that the reason behind the man hating the group was his childhood with his hateful parents...Not his own free will. People don't just choose to hate/love things... their feeling MUST be based on a cause of somesort.

It seems to me that many people have this scewed vision of "Fate". Yes, fate is a predetermined path; what is going to happen will happen no matter what. You as a living being WILL react to your surrounding; whatever you choose is your "choice"; but you would have choosen it anyways...

I was fated to tell you about this, just as well as you where fated to discuss this. You WILL react to this in some way, be it big or small (you can ignore it or Explode); but the fact remains that you will take an action. What ever that action is, was your "Fate".

Freewill as we think is an Illusion. You have no real control over your belives, feelings, thoughts. They are a direct reaction of your surrounding enviroment, which, in itself is Cause and effect.

Amist the Blue Skies...
Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 01:19
I dunno if I fully agree with you on fate, I have often wondered, one day I'll decide, until then,

You're just jealous cuz the voices don't talk to you!!!
TheAbomb12
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2003
Location: Amist the blue skies...
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 01:24
Quote: "I dunno if I fully agree with you on fate, I have often wondered, one day I'll decide, until then, "


What ever you eventually decide you would have decided anyways...

Amist the Blue Skies...
Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 01:32
lol, Abomb, lol

You're just jealous cuz the voices don't talk to you!!!
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 07:51
Quote: "@Exeat, your link to that GIF appears to have excited someone from that site - The image is copyrighted, so can you remove it please?"


Done but christ, who would get so bent up over one image of a graph?


"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Proteus 1935
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Brazil
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 08:16
I just love the topic (sig & nick tell it all):

@Mr Flibble

Quote: " until I found some Greek, Roman or 18th century writer had got there first ..."


Can't get to your website but from what's posted here your theory is actually LaPlace's Determinism Laplace said that if he knew the current state of the universe he could then predict the future... The problem is that this(predicting) isn't possible...

Currently coding: MAG
Recent coding: Video Capture Plug-in
Pharos, Time traveling since 2025
Proteus 1935
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Brazil
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 08:45
@Mentor:
Quote: " quantum effects are large enough to alter the results of nuerons firing in the brain, so a small percentage of all that people do is based on unpredictable random quantum effects "


This is where my head starts to hurt whenever I discuss the subject (Yeah i've got some friends that enjoy talking about it ):

unpredictable... Is an event random just because I can't predict it? or is randomness a relative concept? Modern physics says that nobody can predict certain events... but that only mean that from our referential* we don't have the required information to do it...

*What I tryed to say:
The "Are we living in a shadow" theory might say that randomness is relative...

I hope I make sense...

Currently coding: MAG
Recent coding: Video Capture Plug-in
Pharos, Time traveling since 2025
Lynx
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Jan 2004
Location: IRC chat
Posted: 8th Apr 2004 10:27
I have a few points and questions I would like to annoy everyone with.

My first is about the first theory. I was just thinking, if our technology advances enough, maybe we could figure out how to "read" particles? If your theory is true, then we could be reading the future? Or we altar it a bit, then the future is ours .

And about the traveling back in time theory, what if you went back in time, but not to change anything? Just to spectate, or observe everything. How would it become a paradox then?

Every time you look at the stars, or even the sun, you are looking into the past. Because (someone may have said this earlier) the light that the planets give off takes about 600 years to travel to our planet (give or take a few million years). So wouldn't it be possible to "be" in the past (in itself)? Does anyone get what I'm talking about here?

Wik
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st May 2003
Location: CT, United States
Posted: 9th Apr 2004 23:56
eh hem...light from the sun takes approximatly 8 minutes to get here i beleive.


Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 01:14
correct
give or take a few million nanoseconds

You're just jealous cuz the voices don't talk to you!!!
andrew11
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 01:20
Your not looking at the past really, just photons from the past. Some stars in the sky dont even exist anymore! Whats more, sometimes you see 2 stars that are really one because photons are bent around a gravity source. Everything you see technically is an illusion.

"All programmers are playwrites and all computers are lousy actors" -Anon
Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 01:28
I do remember hearing the thing about how stars in the sky may not actually be there and all

You're just jealous cuz the voices don't talk to you!!!
AnDrEy
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jan 2004
Location: In Da Club
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 12:32
So if you cannot actually choose to like something/hate something out of your own free will then I decide to hate SNL-Cast right now out of my own free will (randomly chosen) and I will try to make everyone around me do the same. How does the no free will theory deal with this?
(so the cause being my own free will, effect being removed all my snl-cast songs and crushed a coke can)

Pincho Paxton
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 13:17
Whatever your response to this post is, it is not random, or free will according to this topic, it is a response to something that you read, to a topic that was made by someone else. A case where free will might occur is when you have a 50/50 choice over something. Then things could branch off in two different directions. The universe is said to expand, and then collapse, and then expand again to re-start the whole thing over again. I doubt if it expands the second time, the same way that it expanded the first time. Two explosions would not be alike, and also how could we decide that we are in a repeating pattern the first time that the universe expands. I think that we have free will actually.

Pincho.

AnDrEy
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jan 2004
Location: In Da Club
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 13:23
Ok thats true but I still beleive in free will

Mentor
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 14:26
the rampant hamster swam the river of fire and killed the demon toaster as he lurked in his fortress of sherbet

free will 1 determinism 0

Mentor.

PC1: P4 hyperthreading 3ghz, 1gig mem, 2x160gig hd`s, ATI radeon 9800 pro gfx, 6 way surround sound, PC2: AMD 1.2ghz, 512mb ram, FX5200 ultra gfx, stereo 16 bit soundblaster, ups.
Pincho Paxton
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 19:21
That still is not free will if you beleive the theory. You read this topic, you though about how you would reply in a totally random way. You thought up words that had a certain percentage of obscurity about them. Swam a river makes sense. Hamsters can swim. A river of fire is something from films like James Bond, or Indiana Jones. Killed the demon is logical. Demons lurk, and might live in a fortress. A sherbet fortress might be because you have recently watched Willy Wonka, or just fancied sherbet, or you had to think of a fortress made from a food substance because of buildings being made from food in stories from your childhood. No matter how strange you think you can make a sentence it will always abide to some rules. Even if those rules are dictated by the position of the keys on a standard keyboard.

Pincho.

AnDrEy
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jan 2004
Location: In Da Club
Posted: 10th Apr 2004 23:51 Edited at: 10th Apr 2004 23:53
ok but even if the everything is a preditermined cause effect chain of particles there is no real way ( ) you can prove that a certain level of chaos/random chance/free will does not lurk somwhere around those particles like
cause->effect->random|->effect

bitJericho
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 11th Apr 2004 01:03
well.. if you think about it..what causes an explosion to be different everytime... now what if this explosion happend a bazillion times and that there were no outside forces to change it in any way (because everything is in one place)...well I would hazard a guess that the same atoms and such particles were in the exact same place they exploded as last time.. or in at least a pattern, for instance, its 100 different explosions and they take turns one after another and repeat...

Who knows?

The Unofficial DarkBASIC Magazine : http://www.dbspot.com/j2dstudios/
Pincho Paxton
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 11th Apr 2004 01:24
Actually, I can sort of proove that the explosion will be different each time using logic. There is an explosion that causes a burst of atoms OK. Now imagine all of those atoms spreading outwards. Now reverse the picture, and they all move back together again to the big bang...OK that is like a repeating pattern.....

Now........

Imagine this time that the atoms have grouped together to form planets. Now when you reverse the picture the planets move towards the big bang, not the individual atoms. The planets bump into each other, the whole structure is different this time, because the planets aren't likely to dissolve backwards like a tornado of atoms.

Pincho.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-09-21 15:58:28
Your offset time is: 2024-09-21 15:58:28