Thread 16653778

Let’s say everything everywhere, every when, exists all at once. All goods and all bads. A big fat annoying “multiverse”, or “omniverse”, or whatever pretentious word you want to use.

By such a point, is existence deterministic or one of pure probability?

>>16653778 (OP)
Both answers collapse into each other, and the question is revealed to be nonsense.

>>16653778 (OP)
Existence that is determined through probability.

>>16653778 (OP)
Everett's Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is considered a "deterministic" interpretation, for what that's worth.

>>16653791
But isn’t everything just probabilistic differences by such a point?

>>16653778 (OP)
That omniverse coincides with the will so it’s not deterministic or probabilistic, it is willful

u guys r sayin such b ig words

>>16653938
What fucking will? What /x/ tier bullshit is this?

>>16653998
You understand consciousness is an observable phenomena right? In an omniverse it would decide and so the system could only be described as wilful given true symmetry allows for indeterminate action.

>>16654022
>You understand consciousness is an observable phenomena right?
Observable in what way? By human science? No. Alien science utterly transcendent to our own? Yes. Looking each other in the face isn’t enough of an observation.

Quack quark

We don’t want to entertain that far ahead.

>>16653778 (OP)
Duck.

Gottem

Duck meet frog
>>16643631

Woof

>>16653778 (OP)
duck

>>16653778 (OP) >>16661627
Cosmic duck thoughts

>>16661804
Beautiful

>>16653778 (OP)

were you partially blind and people just appear out of nowhere but at predictable sector in vision as you move forward or backward must be deterministic then

First time?

>>16663310
Lmaooo
What does this mean

>>16663310
Motherfuckers

>>16663310
….

Quacking thread

I don’t know okay

Quacking question

>>16653778 (OP)
Pretty much

>>16673274
They cannot answer it.

>>16661804
ai slop duck

>>16654041
By the brain itself, without it, can you really observe anything? Or even type what you post? The brain just helps project what you see in reality, without it, you practically can't project anything at all.

Idk

>>16653778 (OP)
Idk maybe

Hm.

>>16653778 (OP)
cute duck

Everything might really just be Everything.

>>16687483
Yeah.

>>16653778 (OP)
In the mountains of mathematics, those are connected by many paths.

Chaos theory is all about how a deterministic thing is predictable short term, unpredictable medium term, and "predictable" long term.

Central limit theory of statistics is all about how a probability thing is "predictable" short term, and how and distribution converges into a very narrow bell curve long term, approaching certainty.

Certainty into uncertainty.
Uncertainty into Certainty.

And there are many other paths too, these are just examples

.

>>16653778 (OP)
Both; the point is to explore where your current model breaks, to test holographic fidelity. That's why magick is hidding in video games.

>>16653778 (OP)
cut dog

>>1665380
imagine the trolley problem, but from the perspective of the trolley starting down the track
at some point in the future the switch will be thrown or not, with probability p
but by the time the trolley arrives at the switch, the universe has been split into two universes - one in which the switch has been thrown, one in which it has not been thrown
the tram splits also into two copies, and each continues on its way, in universes where things proceed as if the switch HAD ALWAYS BEEN in a certain position
the initial trolley car is blind to the person throwing the switch or not, because this event is in the future
from its perspective, there is informational uncertainty, the passengers in the trolley could amuse themselves by guessing at the probability p and making bets on their guesses
however if you look at the timeline of any given trolley copy past the switch, there was never any uncertainty, the track only exists in one configuration which was always and will always be thus

>>16693209
Who are you responding to

>>16694398
OP, basically
I think Everett is a retard, btw, for choosing to multiply universes just to have a hope in hell of dealing with GR
Bohmian particles-on-tracks model accomplishes the exact same thing in a single universe

Multiverses are cool

>>16653778 (OP)
It's deterministic because every possibility exists at once. Chance means uncertainty about the outcome but you can't have any uncertainty by definition, because every outcome is as realized as any other.

I guess so

It’s deterministic, but probabilistic cunts will cope by claiming it’s ackchyually probabilistic.

>>16653778 (OP)
>is existence deterministic or one of pure probability?
existence is running on quantum "engine\script".
So it's neither this or that. Ffs, check quantum biology. Is the north pole deterministic or accidental for a robin? Everything runs on quantum mechanics, absolutely, especially your brain\consciousness. 208gk

>>16661804
cosmic cnt

Huh?

>>16700788
What now?

>>16653778 (OP)
Duck.