x0rn

Building agents and their homes: scientist, poet, musician, duellist!***
-Reginald Barclay, as Cyrano de Bergerac

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

I think the Copenhagen interpretation is misunderstood by almost everyone. If you take the following quote from Bohr: "It is wrong to say that physics tells us about reality, physics tells us *what we can say* about reality" (emphasis added) --> it points to an epistemology that not only makes the Copenhagen interpretation easier to understand, it is actually the epistemology we need to break out of the hyper-rational/propositional tyranny that we are currently trapped in.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@TexasIrishTerri @walterkirn Fair enough -- it is sometimes hard to pickup tone through text. They need a comic sans option or something.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@TexasIrishTerri @walterkirn People using plants that people have used for, quite literally, THOUSANDS of years, cannot be the cause of a problem that showed up 10ish years ago. Try again.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@BobMurphyEcon

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@BobMurphyEcon

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@ChrisMartzWX In @elonmusk's defense: he is talking on 100 million year time scale, not about the current climate catastrophism

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@scottmsul @aJoshuaB @BobMurphyEcon That's fair.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@elonmusk @p_ferragu What if the universe expands faster than we can count Planck cubes?

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@scottmsul @aJoshuaB @BobMurphyEcon the 'sense of completeness' in this case would be saying 'it contains ALL of the integers' -- you are saying it is a complete set of the integers.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

A 'completed infinity' is the fundamental, new concept that Cantor introduced with his Diagonalization Proof (or one of them). It is what Poincare objected to. Poincare said that the idea of a "competed infinity," i.e. an infinite set that you can talk about having some sense of completeness, was poorly defined at best and incoherent at worst --> Think of it this way: we are talking about diagonalization right? Another example of this (I think Godel was specifically influenced by Cantor in this) is Godel Incompleteness. It says that you can't have a system that is BOTH complete and consistent. So from that perspective, Poincare is correct.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@scottmsul @aJoshuaB @BobMurphyEcon "they all get listed eventually" - I don't think that works because then you are presuming completed infinities in order to prove them

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@vctrfrts @BobMurphyEcon I've seen some work connecting all of this (Godel Incompleteness, Cantor's Diagonal proof, incomputability/the halting problem (Turing), etc..)under the mantle of 'diagonaliztion' -- it's almost like they are all instances of a deeper, underlying principle.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@BobMurphyEcon You can do that - and you would have a new number, but there are an infinite number of integers. I feel like your walking us up to the idea that Cantor's concept of completed infinities is suspect. (Poincare agrees)

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

You can - one of the implications of his proof is that the set of reals between any two integers and the integers are identical (in some sense - don't come at me mathematicians) - I actually devised a mathematical operator to prove this in a simple, easy to understand way. I've been meaning to write a paper about it. You've inspired me.

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@dhh @TimJanik How does one offer a proposal to Omacom?

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

I like Mises and Rothbard better than Rand --> she makes the same mistake so many modern libertarians make. It's a Nietzschean mistake: her program presumes you could totally recreate your own values, that you could build a society in a vacuum outside of history and culture. A political philosophy needs to be embedded in a set of cultural values or it becomes totalizing and ultimately totalitarian. [that's what is happening to liberalism in the west right now]

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@esrtweet What about Nozick? I know he is seen more as a political philosopher than a moral one, but he famously went after Rawls (who is perhaps the type specimen of the bad, recent, moral philosophy you reference here).

[x0rn @x0rn_2A]

@AlexFinn What you are calling Omarchy is actually Linux + Omarchy or as I've come to calling it...blah blah blah I don't feel like writing the whole copy pasta - you know the drill