• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. LegionOnomaMoi

    Does consciousness change the rules of quantum mechanics?

    If that were the real issue, then one could reasonably expect that the kind of statistics one gets from any sort of EPR-type experiment would produce non-classical correlations. But this isn't true. You can have use local resources to produce quantum correlations for the EPR and EPRB set-ups...
  2. LegionOnomaMoi

    Does consciousness change the rules of quantum mechanics?

    It's what comes after 6 hours of writing until 5AM for work. But the point is that time dilation and length contraction are 1) Both based on an invariant 2) Both deal with physical properties that can be measured by the same observers. In other words, Alice (or whoever is in the train) "sees"...
  3. LegionOnomaMoi

    Dispelling the myth of “hypothesis”

    The problem isn’t so much that creationists (or anyone else) never took college courses in science, nor is it a question of whether they did well in these courses. To the extent that we can say “the problem” (as opposed to one of many problems), the far more central issue is that scientific...
  4. LegionOnomaMoi

    Does consciousness change the rules of quantum mechanics?

    The point is the predictions of QM require two fundamentally different types of state update/evolution for the same system, only one of which we have empirical access (loosely speaking). And the entire point was to formulate scenarios and then experiments to test to see if the predictions of QM...
  5. LegionOnomaMoi

    Does consciousness change the rules of quantum mechanics?

    It is fundamentally and radically different. To oversimplify: In relativity, with two observers in some version of some classic thought experiment, we have Alice and Bob moving relative to one another, but both believing themselves to be at rest. An easy example is some kind of moving lab or...
  6. LegionOnomaMoi

    What are some examples of scientism?

    I think it might be more helpful to here from a biologist with a second PhD in philosophy (Massimo Pigliucci) speaking in front of self-labeled skeptics (as a self-identified member) in a talk given for the Center for Inquiry (which "strives to foster a secular society based on reason, science...
  7. LegionOnomaMoi

    Modern Science Confirms Vedic Science

    On the contrary, a great deal of 19th century “science” continued to be heavily influenced by forms of dualism, both in terms of a non-material substances and non-reductive consciousness or mind. This was the beginning of “empirical” vitalism, which lasted into the 20th century and was...
  8. LegionOnomaMoi

    Stumbling Intuition #1: The Monty Hall Problem

    You can replace Monty with a robot or even an algorithm and play this game with the given probabilities and a mindless machine incapable of wants. You can even replace the God's eye view you describe elsewhere and just decide that you want to win and figure out an optimal strategy given the...
  9. LegionOnomaMoi

    Stumbling Intuition #1: The Monty Hall Problem

    Excellent! And perfectly correct, of course (although I would perhaps make sure to add that we require Monty to 1) know where the prize is and 2) only open a non-prize door) To recast the problem without using Bayes' theorem, we can get it in about 2 lines: Let Door_i be the probability that the...
  10. LegionOnomaMoi

    Stumbling Intuition #1: The Monty Hall Problem

    Statistics requires probability (unless one somehow eschews any mention of random variables from statistical analysis). The reverse is not true. In fact, probabilists have so little contact so much of theoretical statistics (let alone actual statistics in practice) that a great deal is...
  11. LegionOnomaMoi

    Stumbling Intuition #1: The Monty Hall Problem

    There's quite a bit more than this. And although it is important (although it's perhaps not the best way to make clear the relevant assumptions), it doesn't necessarily make things clearer. Assume, for example, that Monty doesn't want you to win the car but that there are 1,000 doors, 999 of...
  12. LegionOnomaMoi

    Stumbling Intuition #1: The Monty Hall Problem

    This is true, but highly misleading. It's trivially true because "the notion of looking at different events in terms of their likelihood or probability" is at the heart of frequentist inference and statistical inference more generally, not just Bayesian inference. Also, this problem isn't about...
  13. LegionOnomaMoi

    Stumbling Intuition #1: The Monty Hall Problem

    There are a couple of different questions, approaches, or variations to this problem one might consider to help one understand what’s going on. There are also certain crucial assumptions about this problem that sometimes aren’t pointed out as explicitly and, indeed, may not be made explicit at...
  14. LegionOnomaMoi

    Darwin's Illusion

    1) That isn't really "Noble's framework" at all. The idea of directed evolution, non-random mutations, mutational biases (see e.g., Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana, epigenetic inheritance, and other formulations of this idea predate Noble and have been developed...
  15. LegionOnomaMoi

    Darwin's Illusion

    Absolutely. It is one of the thing I find most baffling in "arguments" presented by proponents of ID/creationists. For a long time, I couldn't really understand even the motivation behind e.g., attacking Darwin or presenting evidence against a version of evolutionary biology that predated our...
  16. LegionOnomaMoi

    Darwin's Illusion

    What on earth would constitute a "single scientific entity" or indeed Noble's framework? The man was a crucial figure in the development of systems biology and a major source for work across disciplines relating to conceptual reforms in biology and related fields. He's a leading research...
  17. LegionOnomaMoi

    If a tree falls and no one is around...

    The problem is that stating "the universe is real" doesn't say much. In particular, with respect to biocentrism or other (sometimes even mainstream) views like that espoused by Lanza and Berman, one can say that there is an external reality independent of us while also claiming that what we...
  18. LegionOnomaMoi

    If a tree falls and no one is around...

    1) There are no axioms of science 2) It is not a necessary assumption. Operationalists (and outside quantum foundations and related fields in the sciences more generally, instrumentalists) can get along quite well with out committing to any external reality, even if I have a hard time believing...
  19. LegionOnomaMoi

    If a tree falls and no one is around...

    The description of quantum theory is mostly just wrong, with the rest just misleading sensationalism. But it doesn't matter. Because we don't need quantum theory to realize that the kitchen, unseen/observed by humans (or observed/seen by humans) doesn't exist as such. This was fleshed out in...
  20. LegionOnomaMoi

    Infinite Regress

    I'll be more blunt then. In short, I was asking in a round about way why you would treat infinity like a number implicitly while claiming it isn't through an argument that seems to rely on completely irrelevant claims about number systems that are also not really true. Put even more concisely...
Top