The Purpose of Humans?

[Nagual]

The thing that's odd about Shroedingers cat idea, is that they say you don't know the cats 'state until you open the box... surely that cat knows it's state?

 

[British Red]

Rather like Granny Weatherwax between the mirrors then?


Now there is brilliant idea!

 

[sandbender]

For a moment I read that as transuranic, but as we all know transuranic elements can't be used where there is life...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transuranium_element

Now that took me back

Sapphire & Steel

 

[gregorach]

The thing that's odd about Shroedingers cat idea, is that they say you don't know the cats 'state until you open the box... surely that cat knows it's state?

The thing you have to remember about Schrödinger's Cat is that Schrödinger was wrong. It doesn't actually work like that at all.

It's one of the great ironies of 20th century physics that the only thing that most people know about quantum mechanics is wrong.

 

[Tadpole]

The thing you have to remember about Schrödinger's Cat is that Schrödinger was wrong. It doesn't actually work like that at all.

It's one of the great ironies of 20th century physics that the only thing that most people know about quantum mechanics is wrong.

Schrödinger’s cat is by his own words was “quite ridiculous “ and not even his own idea, it was an idea he borrowed it from an ancient Sankhya Hindu paradox, the experiment is simple enough in itself. cat in a box with a diabolical device, 50--50 chance of triggering the device in one hour, is the cat alive or dead? The only way to know is open the box. Sure fine in theory, but if after an hour the device is triggered the cat is dead whether or not “you” know it. The cat isn’t alive until you open the box, it’s dead, an ex cat, there is nothing uncertain about the dead cat. If the device doesn’t trigger, then the cat is alive, even if “you” don’t know it. The cat knows it is alive and in a box and blooming angry. And that is all that matters

 

[gregorach]

Well, yes, but he was arguing against a particular form of the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM, which says that waveform collapse is not spontaneous, but is triggered by "observation". The thing is, "observation" was a poor translation from German, and should not be taken to imply sentient observation. Subsequent experiments have demonstrated that wavefore collapse (if such a thing should really exist, contra the Many Worlds Hypothesis) definitely does not require a sentient observer.

Unfortunately, the idea that sentience is somehow involved in QM has stuck in the popular mind, leading to the cack pseudo-science of cranks like Deepak Chopra.

 

[BorderReiver]

must... avoid.... arguing.... with.... British Red.

Why?

Even British Red can talk crap.

 

[BorderReiver]

Schrödinger’s cat is by his own words was “quite ridiculous “ and not even his own idea, it was an idea he borrowed it from an ancient Sankhya Hindu paradox, the experiment is simple enough in itself. cat in a box with a diabolical device, 50--50 chance of triggering the device in one hour, is the cat alive or dead? The only way to know is open the box. Sure fine in theory, but if after an hour the device is triggered the cat is dead whether or not “you” know it. The cat isn’t alive until you open the box, it’s dead, an ex cat, there is nothing uncertain about the dead cat. If the device doesn’t trigger, then the cat is alive, even if “you” don’t know it. The cat knows it is alive and in a box and blooming angry. And that is all that matters

Aye, it's like all these countries being "discovered" by intrepid explorers.

The folk that lived there knew that they existed already.

 

[Blades]

I don't think you can find a purpose in people randomly having sex and evolving for tens of thousands of years.

 

[HillBill]

Its when you take EVERYTHING else in nature into consideration that you realise we are no different in purpose than any other creature/plant. Mating is every creatures instinctual drive to carry on the species, but thats is not our position in the overall picture imo, just the way to ensure that our purpose continues to be fulfilled.

Thing is though, nature gets rid of that which does not serve purpose anymore, she attaches a curse to all inaction.

 

[British Red]

Why?

Even British Red can talk crap.

I resemble that statement!

 

[Tadpole]

I

Thing is though, nature gets rid of that which does not serve purpose anymore, she attaches a curse to all inaction.

Nature does nothing of the sort, nature is not sentient, it has no design, no rhyme or reason and nature has no more ‘purpose’ than we do. Nature is just a ‘collective description’ of the physical world including plants and animals and landscapes. It’s no more sentient than a “collective description” of commonwealth stamps

 

[British Red]

Not sure that I agree there tadpole old bean. I think it is perfectly possible for collections of individual entities to act, consciously or unconsciously with a united purpose.

There are many examples where for example "society" can act through the medium of its elements in way that is not visible to, or directed by, any individual element.

I think the insect world is also an example. The term "hive mind" is a little trite perhaps but the idea that a colony of insects in many ways behaves more like a single entity than a loose collection of entities has, to my mind at least, merit.

Now that being the case there is a possible interpreation that the complex relationships involved in Nature - and the mechanisms that control the entities, can manifest as a "super entity".

You may dismiss this, and thats fine, but I just offer an alternate perspective

Red

 

[HillBill]

Nature does nothing of the sort, nature is not sentient, it has no design, no rhyme or reason and nature has no more ‘purpose’ than we do. Nature is just a ‘collective description’ of the physical world including plants and animals and landscapes. It’s no more sentient than a “collective description” of commonwealth stamps

Thats just your opinion of course, as what i say is mine. You know for sure no more than i do tad

A good example with the insects Red. :0