/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15473866
garbage meaningless post.

Metaphysical autology principle

This has been settled by Langan. Read CTMU if your IQ is smart enough.

>>15473873
>Read CTMU if your IQ is smart enough.

There's a difference between IQ and knowing English to a point you understand his jargon
CTMU could be presented in the form of a coloring book but it's like he wanted to make the presentation to be as exclusive as humanly possible.

>>15473876
Agreed. Using big and complicated words is racist.

>>15473873
That's the most badass photo I've ever seen. I have no idea why it hasn't trended
Probably because kids today dont appreciate intellect

>navel gazing thread

>>15473879
It unironically is. The reason why Africans score 60 in IQ tests isn't because they're somehow genetically dumber. It's that the test was fabricated to suit the industrialized cultural context.

>>15473879
English is not my native language, hell it's not even my 2nd one
It's absolute ass raping torture to try and read his papers as a non-native

>>15473873
complete rubbish lmao. free will is fake. god may or may not exist but that's unknown.

Anons can you explain this:

>For example, suppose you hit a tennis ball with a racket. In the conventional picture, its fate—whether it will hit the net, or bounce into a wall, or fly out of the court—depends on the state of reality outside of you: the positions of surrounding objects, the wind speed, etc. But according to hology, all of this information is already present in your "syntax", or set of laws that governs you. In this new picture, what you see happen to the tennis ball is determined by your own internal processing, and all of the objects which you see as "outside" of you are actually being simulated by your syntax. Hology says that every part of reality has the structure needed to internally simulate its external environment in this way, turning the conventional picture "outside-in":

Is this how reality actually works or is this clever poetry?

>>15473891
neither, it's incoherent drivel

>>15473891
sounds like "le universe just exists in your mind" schizobabble

reminder that anybody who believes in ''laws'' is retarded. According to those people, there a immaterial ''laws'' which govern the entire material universe, and yet those morons can't even explain how immaterial laws act on mater across billions of light years at every single second.

>>15473901
>those morons can't even explain how immaterial laws act on mater across billions of light years at every single second

I think the medieval question of how the "immaterial" acts on the "material" is like asking why was I born me and not a squirrel or a Chinese peasant. You can put the words together to ask the question, but that's it.

>>15473901
having no laws doesn't make sense. something is forcing things to happen.

>>15473901
>material universe

There is no matter. When you touch a wall, you dont actually touch it. The electron fields of your finger repel the electron fields of the wall.
And these fields are actually just mathematical concepts, electrons are just probability waves.
Reality is just math basically.

>>15473917
copenhagen npc pseud trash

>>15473926
I'll use this argument in my next thesis. Thank you.

>>15473917
This is like saying I didn't bake a cake, because actually it's just atoms
fucking retarded

>>15473917
No. You confuse the map (physics) with the territory (empirical reality).

>>15474136
They're one and the same right?

Also I need more insight on this:
>>15473891

If Chris Langan doesnt actually depic the nature of reality here, why did he write that?
I refuse to believe an IQ 200 powerhouse would go out of his way to write an entire book full of science fiction.

>>15474194
>I refuse to believe an IQ 200 powerhouse would go out of his way to write an entire book full of science fiction

that's clearly what he did, so you better believe it. it should show you that iq is a meme.

>>15473891
It emphasizes the fact that in order for laws to act on things according to what other things are doing, things have to have the capacity to "sense"/be receptive to what is happening outside of themselves. But this requires the things outside of you having a structure such that they can be "sensed" (where by sensed here I'm referring to more a sensor than actual human senses, which is a much more general idea).

This necessitates things to have a certain structure, and you can prove properties of things using this "sensor" method. It is a generalized version of Kant's transcendental method, where you look at what is needed in order for you to be conscious in order to prove stuff, and basically construct most of the phenomena that you see and hear out of these necessities. This shift was called Kant's copernican shift.

For example, in Kant you need certain abilities to count, and these abilities necessitate viewing different moments in consciousness as belonging to the same person (this is the "I"), but this sameness requires concepts, but the only concepts we have not depending on experience are logical concepts, so these are applied everywhere in consciousness. Kant then uses spatial and temporal versions of these logical concepts to derive universal properties of experience.

>>15473866
take meds, schizo trash.