Cause and effect, if you take this at the smallest level observable and take in mind that this is the drive...

Cause and effect, if you take this at the smallest level observable and take in mind that this is the drive. Would then free will not exist? As everything can be traced back, so also your thoughts if they are to be viewed as matter.
Is there "free will" Jow Forums?

Attached: IMG_3938.jpg (2400x1370, 1.22M)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=p-MNSLsjjdo
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem
archive.nyafuu.org/bant/thread/5932160/#5932160
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

cause and effect laws can be applied to alternatives, because every choice is cause of a trail of effects. nonetheless, the choice is still yours. whether you choose A or B and each trail within them, nobody knows you are going to chose one of neither. there lies the free will

Yes but what is your choice governed by, I would argue against that your conciousness is one definite entity and rather a collection of processes. If we view thought as matter this can all be split up in more, smaller, parts all being involved in the chain of casuality. Now, how can we possible be aware of if this is not free will but forced effects of causes on many levels. As your decisions and choices would then also not be of a free choice but rather an effect of many other processes. Just as a paper floats on water so float you in your life, more complicated but governed by the same principle.

Attached: IMG_3927.jpg (774x1031, 126K)

I had an interesting talk about this with a physicist buddy of mine (his IQ is really high so most people probably won't understand this post)
It was a while back so my terminology and understanding of the discussion might be a little off.
Anyway, if you take the same biological organism and put it through the same events, you would expect it to make the same choices every time. But apparently, on account of some kind of quantum bullshit at some minuscule level electrons or something like that have a sort of randomness to them in that as far as we can tell, they don't do the exact same thing every time. Depending on how you interpret it, this could be said to be the mechanism for free will, since this has an impact on the electrical signals sent through the synapses of your brain, which means that the exact same organism put through the exact same series of events wouldn't actually make the exact same choices every time.

Attached: 1530770068854.jpg (1000x1000, 879K)

Or even, maybe choice isn't the right word. It could even have an impact on the degree of success or failure of an action you chose to take

nah it's the observer effect
youtube.com/watch?v=p-MNSLsjjdo

eh, reading on it a little bit I think I'm a bit familiar with this and that isn't what was being explained to me, unless I'm not understanding this correctly
The observer effect refers to how certain phenomena change when observed, right? If that's the case, wouldn't the interactions in the brain need to be observed to be able to change? Or are we getting into "conscious dreamers can be treasurers to their own currency" territory here

You watch those guys too?

Right, I watched the video and they don't really cover this aspect of it
>While electrons traveling through a barrier with two slits create interference patterns when unobserved, these interference patterns disappear when scientists detect which slit each electron travels through.
Maybe this is what was being referred to. But is it the case that observation is necessary or unnecessary to achieve this interpretation of free will?

It's the observing alone that change the possiblity of events that will happen and the observer hasn't to be a living thing with eyes and brain.

In the Double-Slits-Experiment as mentioned even technical equipment that could "observe" the electrons for themselves changed the final outcome.
Welp, the conclusion is more going into "conscious dreamers can be treasurers to their own currency" territory.

In the end we actually could theoretically shape our reality like as many religious central figures preached, but this would go scientifically speaking beyond out understanding and we would never achieve such state of mind to our present knowledge by any normal means.

This is in any case what I get out of this.

>Welp, the conclusion is more going into "conscious dreamers can be treasurers to their own currency" territory.
That's okay, I like it >:^)
There's some other interesting writings on it but to be honest I feel that a good chunk of it goes over my head without putting some real effort into understanding it
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem

Attached: I can be treasurer to my own currency.jpg (620x465, 40K)

Well, I have some interest in physics and quantum mechanics, I guess he's talking about the observer effect as showcased in the double slit experiment. As mass would behave like waves when not observed (or always), shooting a particle through a gap, however two gaps would be present, the particles shot through would hit the other side like a wave would, as two wave fronts would be needed for this interference pattern it would indicate that the particle passes through both gaps at the same time. When detectors are placed over the gaps this would not be the case. I'm still not sure how it would change the concept of free will, as free will in itself might be a poorly explained concept. That we do which we choose, but how much of what we do is entirely governed by those urges and necessities lifes bring? What would constitute a free choice devoid of any of this, or would free will incorporate this? Mixing philosophy and quantum physics can sometimes be sketchy I feel and since I don't know enough on the subject, I have not researched it enough but I intend to do. Untill then I can't speak about it in any useful capacity.

Attached: IMG_3883.png (800x998, 354K)

But one thing that comes to mind is the fact that the future does not exist, it should not be decided, therefore I wonder if this is as far-fdtched as we hold it to be?

Attached: IMG_3939.png (500x446, 468K)

After what little reading I've done in response to the discussion, I don't believe the observer effect is specifically what was being referred to, since a lot of the articles I was reading about it refer to quantum mechanics and not the experiment directly. I will ask my friend next time I talk to him though.
Do I not get fresh satoris anymore?
I guess it's okay. They were supposed to be compensation for the blogposts that I decided I shouldn't make anymore anyway, and between here and /c/ I've got a lot of them now.

Please ask and tell me more, sounds interesting. This makes me want to dive deeper into it myself.
What's your thoughts on free will if we don't take QM into consideration?
Also, I have your satoris so I use them myself too! Don't cut the deal, here's a fresh one! ^-^

Attached: IMG_3953.jpg (800x563, 278K)

Well, like I said, without that I don't really have any reason to believe the exact same biological entity that was put through the exact same experiences would make choices any differently than it does, so there wouldn't be free will in that sense. At the same time, that's not a thing that generally occurs, so it's not something to let bother you or feel like you're anything other than yourself. Even identical twins go through different experiences that make them at least slightly different people - in fact, the only identical twins I ever talk to are extremely different people, to the point where the different expressions they tend to make has led to it being possible to tell them apart when they hold a neutral expression if you look very closely, despite them both weighing almost exactly the same
>Don't cut the deal
What did you mean by this?

I mean that I'll keep giving you satoris in exchange for services! ^o^
I agree, but identical twins behave differently because their interference with the world around them was different.

Attached: IMG_3879.jpg (882x906, 85K)

Actually, what luck. He was actually around on the discord server when I called him out. Unsurprisingly, he doesn't remember the conversation (he's kind of an absentminded guy for stuff like this) but he says it's not really the observer theory, although that's related. To sum up what he said in my (retard) terms at the smallest levels without - without an observer present - the activities are all probability, so they're not deterministic.
As far as the Satoris, if it's all the same I'll probably only respond if I have something worth saying or I get called out specifically. Even before Ade complained about it I was starting to feel that some of the vapid replies I was giving were a little obnoxious.

It is true that they are indeed probabilities, that much I know. Which is interesting, there are other experiments on this with rather intriguing results. I guess it ties in to what I said earlier, what is the future if it doesn't exist - probability? Not sure where I'm going with this, just something trashing around on my mind.
Well, I liked them but if you feel the judgement of others is heavy on you I'd understand. ^-^

Attached: IMG_3876.jpg (278x350, 37K)

>Well, I liked them but if you feel the judgement of others is heavy on you I'd understand.
No, that's not the case. If I weren't me and I saw this sort of thing, I would think of it a little contemptuously. Like I said, I was thinking something similar even before he complained. I wouldn't have replied to the thread had he not summoned me. I wouldn't stop making posts I thought were good just because somebody complained about it.

That's understandable! ^-^ I'm tired lately, and it's failing

Attached: IMG_3929.jpg (551x551, 117K)

Actually thinking on it now I'm almost inclined to keep doing it out of spite. Plus Ade might complain about it again, which is always funny.

Sounds like he might have been talking about quantum indeterminism, which is something I've heard before to rebut the argument of free will's non-existence. A quick search can give you some articles explaining it better than I could.

But at least the shark thread is a good one, right?

Thanks, I'll look into that!

What's failing?
He explained it pretty articulately and thoroughly to me, I just suck at paraphrasing him, lole
Yeah, that is a fun one. I'm almost a little happy that you keep being too lazy to maintain it. Some of the results are fun to write up. After it dies maybe give me some ideas to steal so I can make a thread like it of my own, okay?

Attached: yuuka-cute.png (600x600, 92K)

Sure, glad if I can give someone inspiration! I just wish I could explain my thoughts better..

You make the assumption that everything can be traced back, but we have no way to prove that we have observed the full image when looking at cause and effect. There might be a variable out of sight, yet to be discovered.

But consciousness is not matter. Strictly speaking, it is a combination of energy and time.

But energy = matter, isn't conciousness sprung somewhere in your mind, from your many neural pathways which are driven by electrical impulses and chemical compounds. Is not an electron matter?

I thought E=mc^2?

Using that excuse you can explain away anything as arbitrarily lacking precise enough evidence.

Isn't quantum uncertainty via the randomized movement of electrons a universal constraint to all matter?

I think that's roughly what was explained to me but you're asking the wrong person for a definite answer

Attached: __original_drawn_by_gurande_g_size__a06a5b389881b50d7e206a23701aafa5.jpg (1300x1818, 1.47M)

yep.

disc

Perhaps Sweden might answer. They seem rather smart.

Maybe, but I think this is outside Sven's area of expertise.

kys cirnonigger

kys cirnonigger

Why wife chino is so cute

you are talking about the chaos theory. indeed there are many factors that contribute on making decisions. nonetheless, there is no proofed theory that undermines free will in an absolute deterministic context. you can deconstruct a choice in pieces of determined factors (such as environment, race, family history, gender, education, etc) but you will still be faced with a percentage that's totally free, undeterminated by forces and involved with the best result here and now

Attached: 1388797067085.jpg (303x313, 50K)

How do true random number generators work? I think we can extrapolate through that whether free will is possible via whether true randomness exists to begin with.

"True" RNG work by analyzing background radiation and extrapolating a number from that. Is radiation emission random?

Can you speak in English? Or Swedish.

OP just ran the theory that everything comes from a first unified cause and has a drive to evolve in something bigger more perfect and can't just stay still in the complex sentence generator.

Attached: 1532361627004.jpg (552x564, 46K)

Illusion of free will lies either in
a) ignorant yet extremely complex atom clouds like you o/
b) the "smallest of sense" being somehow driven by another system of collisions and meanings \o/
You know.. if we would to be told that e͟v͟e͟r͟y͟t͟h͟i͟n͟g͟ has a connection with at least X amount of things - which is quite easy to observe within our spectrums already - and that making one move could trace it's results in quadrylion different forms that would later collide with their connections and on, and on..
If we would to take determinism onto possibly highest levels, there would be no longer such thing as singular causes.
If Big Bang still has it's effects on the universe by constant expanding force, fighting with gravitation in an near eternal wrestle, and will provide our universe with such collisions, variables that still shake it's web of causes on a truly universal scale, and will do it till it's end - is there a reason not to believe the old adage "what goes around, comes around"?
If with every second, vibrations on the web of reasons travel, gather, collate as well as collide, and - above all - multiple and gather force from a reason that has born literally everything, constantly and forever as we know it, I ask again - is there really a reason not to believe that even if universe can extinguish it's activity in certain parts of itself, actions can still gather and
complex one another into unimaginable forms - like humans and life

Attached: .png (1024x749, 117K)

I mean.. time probably doesn't affect smallest levels of existence same way as it does for our everyday perspective.
But if so, then what are the variables? How time feels for a thing of multiple causes - like a star which provides it's accumulated atoms easy way to affect one another..
..and how it feels when there's literally nearly nothing to influence? When a singular particle just.. is.
I mean - other than radiation and gravitation, as well as probably many other neat effects I have no idea of being known to the mankind.

Does a star feel like time's much slower or would that be the case for an atom? ̶I̶f̶ ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶u̶m̶u̶l̶a̶t̶e̶d̶ ̶s̶u̶c̶h̶ ̶a̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶c̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶w̶o̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶i̶m̶i̶n̶i̶s̶h̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶b̶i̶l̶l̶i̶o̶n̶s̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶y̶e̶a̶r̶s̶,̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶c̶l̶e̶a̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶m̶a̶s̶s̶,̶ ̶t̶i̶m̶e̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶f̶l̶y̶ ̶f̶a̶s̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶
Is world able to experience some kind of a lag? ʕ•ᴥ• ʔ

Attached: .jpg (591x565, 53K)

This might be a stupid question of Ockham's redundancy levels but setting aside our moral thinking that let's us decide about nearly eternal things to experience time in a rather faster manner than the ones which's livespan happens to be nearly immesurable by our thinking~
Bery fast.
Like two atoms colliding after a nanoseconds worth of rest.

If there's something responsible for the calculations of universal laws of physics etc., should it accelerate when met with higher demands (all kinds of phenomeons inside of stars and other giant deposits of happenings in the universe) or will it slow down by the amount of insane things it has to let happen?

Attached: .gif (156x312, 353K)

Attached: BSOD.png (850x716, 433K)

Attached: Tea.png (400x300, 191K)

thanks doc

Attached: a55b4aa1e44a57ec69ddae9f501e9309.jpg?e=1532530487&m=Ny8GmuNNNKRVQA9FqjQIxg.jpg (600x800, 194K)

Ah you touch on this very interesting thing, let's say this "Big Bang" is what started things, then as I argued about in earlier happy day threads and in that thread with the BadApple fellow this would tie in to my theory that this drive is the all everything. I said it like this, that one thing we can tell with this universe is that it's loud. Not in the way that you would think, that the universe would be full of vibrations stimulating your hearing apparatus but that the casuality itself would be a very busy thing, without it what would happen? Wouldn't that be "nothing"? You see, if you start thinking about what effects what, and that each cause also have an effect prior to it this can quickly become overwhelming for the human brain, if you think about it, it quickly becomes rather "loud" - I would say. Maybe this is where my fear of constant acceleration stems from, it's not the fear of constant acceleration in exact terms but rather it would be the out of control acceleration of thoughts that would happen given you would try to put your mind into this immense loudness.
But the same thing can be applied to life, as I said earlier and as I tried to argue this same drive would be the same participant. As you can quite easily imagine in accordance with evolution that we stem from one original ancestor, our own little big bang in our own isolated little universe. This life was then driven to continued existence, it was driven to remain and did so through the act of reproduction - reproduction being it's way as a manifestation of this drive to remain in form, this has then led us to where we are today - same life, split up in "parts", not that the split matters in itself, you could still tie it together but it is self sustaining. This can be applied to our own life, the evolution of life and the universe.

Attached: sayori_31.png (335x417, 350K)

Oi, I've heard about that experiment as well~
>how that would even matter to the concept of free will
You know, to understand something deeply, one will always end up looking at the smallest of fractions, because that's most likely where all of the reasons come from o/
To see it as a growing up fractal - rule of golden spiral that can be regulated to nearly everything~
Starting from various arts as poetry and fine half-conscious products of that whole free will, then, going by with philosophy, you start to look down into deep abyss. Slowly descending, like on a ladder built by madness itself - the concept - having thousands of dangerous byproducts, outcomes, that can be called as fake, just because of somebody's incomprehention or unknown yet logics.

Anyway - if philosophy's known for theories, it's just as I described it to be - a man, staring down into the abyss. He can't experience anything but has a great overall sight on his goal.
Then, again - by going lower and lower, you are forced to take notice on the details - sets of rungs in the ladder, parts of truth, science, everything you want. A real thing.
And finally - the ladder making concepts. If the image of free will must be studied, it must also be it's path.

I do believe, that as long as it's related to, well - everything we think is right, we can observe it and comprehend - it comes into those smallest of small. Physics, that is o/
Everything and the only things we ever try to comprehend are physics.
Until we won't know other ways of reality, it will be always physics..

^I have no idea if this makes any sense in English, not to mention the meaning itself.
My only defence could be the fact, that I ate too many grapes on a hot day, so forgive me my unexplained blunder.
I'll post it nonetheless even if that would make me look stupid or ignorant towards other ideas - just because I don't feel like wasting it all, lole

Attached: .png (828x720, 741K)

Btw, wouldn't that mean the concept of free will is wrongly understanded? Towards this theory, of course~!
I mean, if it all enclosures on that random-quantum-bullshit, then aren't we just like signing under that phenomena? (´・ω・`)
The fact that there's some primal randomness in everybody, conflicts with the concept of free will, as we know, it even more.
It would literally only change the fact, that in everybody's magnum opus, it's not just physics that do the whole thing but also.. quantum physics, I guess..?
If you can't control it - it's still not "you", right? That's how free will works, right..?
I'm not the best at explaining things in foreign languages ᵉᵛᵉᶰ ᵗʰᵒ ᴵ'ᵐ ᵍᵉᵗᵗᶦᶰᵍ ᵇᵉᵗᵗᵉʳ ᵃᵗ ᵗʰᶦˢ~
And especially when I'm too lazy to re-read the whole thing and edit it.
Sometimes thoughts have their greatest value while served completely raw, r-right haha ( ´ ▽ ` )b
>universe is loud
I feel embarrassed for not using that phrase earlier.
Looks like I focused too much on imagining the net rather than vibrations alone ( ´ ▽ ` )b
>our own little big bang in our own isolated little universe
>This can be applied to our own life, the evolution of life and the universe
Oi, that's the world I was constantly missing - "applied"

Attached: .png (1642x996, 66K)

yes haha ʕ•ᴥ• ʔ

Now here you start to touch on something interesting, time itself, do you not? Given casuality started with something, a unified cause spreading into what we see today. Wouldn't this drive then in itself be time, would it's "time" not be that it moves forward, always, that causes are still followed by effects? So as you put it, if in a star this web would be massive, would it then "take longer"? But isn't it so if what is being manifested is this drive in itself, then in relation to what would it slow down because of high demands? It must surely be so that it would be less if the "activity" lessened, again I think this is where my fear for "constant acceleration" comes in, you see this is where it gets more and more "something" as while if it would go in the other direction it would get closer to nothing. As is then "reality" or the universe or whatever we call that which we deem to exist in relation to that which we say does not exist, as something that wouldn't be - this activity, this drive could it then be seen to have various levels of activity, would it be seen on various levels. Let's say this activity is in itself what we know as the universe, that which we say exist and "nothing" would in return be that of which has none of this, none whatsoever - it would in opposit to "loud" as I said earlier, be "silent". Maybe the louder you picture this, the more out of control you feel of it's power, maybe that's where my fear stems from.

Attached: sayori_47.jpg (1024x1024, 130K)

I feel kinda sorry for everybody who try to read this but lack of imagination needed to misinterpret it and fold into their own thoughts.
Especially while bearing in mind fact, that I often don't exactly understand you as well, Sayori~
But I do believe it's mostly language barrier.
With my problem it being slightly thicker at my side.. (´・ω・`)
Especially when I try to freely translate my national language's word positioning, uwuu~
ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ I'm glad we've come into a common agreement

Attached: .jpg (1176x1000, 724K)

Could you describe your fear any better..?
I mean, by "constant acceleration" you feel like universe gains information? That it slowly boils up, even with it's constant expand..?
From what I know, space as we know it, tends to draw upon total entropy rather than an "uncontrolable loudness".
Unless it would start shrinking..
Then the "Big Bounce" theory comes into play~

Attached: le big bounce.jpg (600x415, 109K)

this is fisher price doc and big stupid

That's beautifully written yuuka, I still latch on to that problem with physics relying on our sensory output, as it investigates and bases reality on what we can percieve. I know this is frowned upon by many, but I still can't help to wonder what "reality" would be outside of this "yourself" and the parts that constitutes it.
Hey yuuka, do you ever feel life to become less and less real the older you get? I can't help thinking that reality felt crystal clear and certain when I was a child, but the more I learnt about the world and various things the more vague it started feeling, the less was I sure of it's reality - and subsequently, the less real did my every day life start to feel. Sometimes, during a storm during the day I regain that feeling of reality I used to have as a child, I then feel again grounded, that's why I enjoy stormy days when I can look out the window and feel as if I'm truly here.

Attached: lk_22.png (2149x3035, 2M)

I could explain it pretty easily since as a child I had a recurring dream on the topic, which is interesting. This dream could come to me several nights in a row and I remember it to be very uncomfortable. In the dream I was picking things from a conveyor belt and put it in it's respective place, it was a rather simple concept and as long as I was able to put the right thing in it's right place the world was smooth and the colors were comfortable. This tie in to what I said about certain smooth kind of colors, those without interference, those that are just that color when you imagine them void of anything outside it. However, in my dream either the objects would be too many and pile up on the belt, or outside it or the belt itself would keep speeding up. This general acceleration of pace would continue and the feeling of dread would accelerate with it, it would be a constant acceleration of this untill I woke up.

Attached: sayori_113.jpg (850x850, 103K)

Maybe you're just better at english than me T_T Given a lot of people seem to have issues understading me.
Hey, I tried to explain my theory to the BadApple fellow in a recent thread, and he seemed to get my drift. Maybe I explained it better there than I did in the happy day threads, if you want you could read it through! ^-^ archive.nyafuu.org/bant/thread/5932160/#5932160

Attached: owlhattos.jpg (621x700, 83K)

Although I just woke up from a decent sleep, after a long period of sleep deprivation. So as of right now I'm rather mushy in the brain!

Attached: c__irno.png (490x548, 292K)

>Hey yuuka, do you ever..
Now that's more like a question soaked in psychology rather than just having it as a background :b
It surely does feel less real for people that think so. That's it, lole o/
If you don't take stuff into account or they just "aren't mixing together" with your past experience in certain way, it doesn't affect your everyday mentality so badly~
I'm getting tired of this ᵃᶰᵈ ᵗʰᵉʳᵉ'ˢ ᵃ ᵗʰʳᵉᵃᵈ ᶦᶰ ᵒᶰᵉ ʰᵒᵘʳ, ᵘʷᵘᵘ~ =w=
You can always just disbelieve or ignore some facts. That's how you break your friendship with knowledge and become a sophist o/
They tend to be a pretty good poets tho~
Now that's what I call a nightmare ʕ•ᴥ• ʔ
It could make for a beautiful short-animated movie though xd
ᴴᵒʷ ᶜᵃᶰ ʸᵒᵘ ʷʳᶦᵗᵉ ˢᵒ ᶠᵃˢᵗ⋅⋅
I have read most of it - we even talked a bit in the middle :b
I'll check if I understood everything correctly later. ᴼʳ ᶦᶠ ᴵ ᵉᵛᵉᶰ ʳᵉᵃᵈ ᵗʰᵉ ʷʰᵒᶫᵉ ᵗʰᶦᶰᵍ⋅⋅ ᵀʷᵀ
You just woke up and write like a madman 2310 symbols without taking to account links and post-links.
In foregin language.
With some sense.
ʕ•ᴥ• ʔ
Wanna try making a happy thread sometime? c:

Attached: nekalice concert.gif (333x250, 370K)

>we even talked a bit in the middle :b
Yas, but I didn't start talking about it untill after that! ^o^
>Wanna try making a happy thread sometime? c:
Sure, the issue is that it might turn out like one of my own threads, with everything that entitles. But absolutely! ^-^
Oh and on a sidenote, Taiga is such a cute!

Attached: taiga41.jpg (1680x1050, 568K)

>taiga41.jpg
Owly Sayori aka Frozen Tiger / Taiga
A man of culture, a man of multiple faces with all of them as real as the other ʕ-ᴥ- ʔ
>turning happy thread into something yare yare
The host has an upper hand of what the thread will look like - there are no wrong answers o/
>Taiga is such a cute!
One of my favorite

Attached: .png (1963x1398, 1021K)