Category: Politics

The Emperor’s New Quantum Mechanics

Let’s make this perfectly clear. You cannot build a gun which you can point at a photodetector, pull the trigger, and get a single click at the photodetector. Hasn’t been done. Can’t be done. There are no pea-shooters for photons. And there are no pea-shooters for electrons either. ~Marty Green

I’ve always had serious doubts about quantum mechanics.

I’m willing to accept that I’m the one in error but it’s very hard to prove to myself when the answers I get boil down to arguments from authority and deeply esoteric detail quibbling.

Let me break down why one famous experiment strikes me as a huge scam. Whether it is or not I leave to you but I’m telling you how I feel and why no amount of googling helps the feeling.

 

First of all notice how there isn’t any critical perspective in that wiki at all. That should strike everyone as extremely suspect. Everything, especially in science, is subject to doubt. Every entry needs a criticism section imo.

Anyway, in order for this experiment to work things have to be assumed.

Like the electron gun is actually firing single electrons. Look what happens when someone questions that.

https://www.quora.com/How-do-scientists-shoot-one-electron-at-a-time

The answer apparently to how this is done is confirmed by a detector.

But the experiment supposedly proves that the whole concept of “single” is questionable. Particles apparently move as waves and interfere with themselves. How is that compatible with the notion of a single electron? If you just attacked singularity itself then doesn’t that attack the experiment since a critical part of it is the assumed ability to fire single things?

And what if the detector is wrong?

What if we’ve basically closed the loop and created a new religion? By that I mean what if our faith in one of the steps is misplaced and the whole system built on it has become faith based?

Like a tower of perfect logic built on a bad premise. What if our assumptions are basically correct by chance but our detection equipment isn’t detecting anything but our own expectations and biases? Hell, QM itself assert that observation produces external real world changes. Doesn’t that negate the whole notion of objective external reality?

If the mere act of seeing changes external reality then in what substantive way are we separate events?

We obviously can’t see the single electron. Indeed if the experiment is true “single” (a concept that requires assumptions in and of itself about the nature of time for example) electrons apparently can’t even exist. So we use a machine to see it for us. What if we’re misunderstanding what the machine is telling us?

The answer usually boils down to “we aren’t, trust me, I’ve got a degree.” That’s insufficient when getting the degree is contingent on accepting the faith based results in the first place. It’s like taking a vote in a monastery. Never mind that a vote doesn’t change reality. Or does it? If one person seeing has an impact then wouldn’t two people seeing have some approximation of twice that impact? I’m reminded of prayer experiments all of the sudden.

Ok so maybe observation effects don’t work that way, but how exactly DO they work and how is it even possible to do experiments if looking changes things?

What if it’s not possible to send out single electrons? How would we ever know if we built the detector assuming it was? If we assume it’s possible, then build a machine to detect what we assume, we’ll only see what we expect.

Until I hear something new I’m going to agree with Marty Green.

There Are No Pea-Shooters for Photons and everything claiming to have been learned from the assumption that there are is suspect.

Update:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/132007/quantum-entanglement-an-illusion-based-on-a-wrong-assumption/224262

I love how all the questions which attack these assumptions are “protected” or locked in the various communities. Questions are so much easier to deal with when you ban asking or answering them.

Update:

This one isn’t.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/239455/spdc-and-single-photon-production

Bernie, Third Parties, and The Sham

Context: http://underlore.com/the-electionfraud-is-real/

Why did Bernie think it was best to work within the Democratic Party instead of starting or joining a third party?

I don’t know what is in his mind but the corruption of 2016 only worked because it was hidden and suspected.

There’s a big difference between cynically asserting corruption and knowing for a fact the entire endeavor is totally false.

With the DNC now admitting they rigged the 2016 primary in open federal court, asserting to do so is totally legal because the DNC is actually a private corporation “doing business as” (a DBA) of “DNC Services Corporation,” things have changed from cynical conspiracy theory or logical inference to indisputably official reality.

It’s now literally public record that the DNC believes it had the right to if it so chose arbitrarily choose a candidate and forgo a primary process entirely. The argument for super delegates being legal is presumably the same.

Search the transcript for the word cigar and you find on page 36:

But here, where you have a party that’s saying, We’re gonna, you know, choose our standard bearer, and we’re gonna follow these general rules of the road, which we are voluntarily deciding, we could have — and we could have voluntarily decided that, Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way. That’s not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right, and it would drag the Court well into party politics, internal party politics to answer those questions.

That has massive consequences. Knowing is different from believing.

Consider for example the absurdity of asserting that Russia should be sanctioned for manipulating an election that the DNC is now asserting was legally a total sham. Because the RNC is a DBA as well. They too presumably would have this legal right to elect whoever why ever and dispense with voting.

That means the DNC is saying that the election for president of the United States is as trivial as a joint poll or contest between the Coke and Pepsi corporations.

Now that argument will either fly or it won’t, but either way now that it’s exposed in federal court, we’ll likely demand that reforms be made as a result of this. Regardless of the outcome of what is ultimately a fairly powerless civil suit. (Powerless in the sense that injunctive relief and/or a check is the best that’s possible as a direct outcome. The judge for example literally can’t order a new set of elections, as far as I know.)

Now, they aren’t saying that they rig all the elections, just that it’s legal for them to do so basically because the DNC is a private corporation that can do whatever it wants legally.

But we all know that isn’t true really, as it’s clearly part of our democracy. At some point the private actions of the private corporation becomes public policy and law. They are trying to get the best of both worlds, all the power and none of the oversight, but it’s not going to work that way. Either reforms will happen (either substantive or merely convincing) or turn out is going to drop into the single digits and the first domino will have fallen.

What won’t happen in my opinion is that this admission causes a third party to become viable because then you’re back with the original problem. They’ll just be a private corporation also. Coke vs Pepsi vs Bob’s Cola.

IMO we’re going to force the DNC and RNC to become the official government things everyone expects them to be and all that that entails. Who knows what that’ll look like or how it’ll play out though.

Bernie knows that like it or not we’re a two party system. Single transferable vote would solve that but until its solved third parties will always be spoilers at best. While the DNC primary might be legally a sham, the various local elections for congress are presumably not. (Though of course that now clearly requires confirmation and scrutiny.)

That means that the answer is still imo not letting the DNC do whatever it wants via #demexit, but to siege the castle and replace the ones that do not govern in our interests.

The One Thing “Red Pill” MRAs Apparently Hate Most: Evidence

TLDR: Inside the Red Pill MRA community, asking the ultra basic first order of business question “is this even real” will get you banned and your comments deleted.

Context: I have made exactly two comments on the entire domain of avoiceformen.com. The first got me scolded and the second got me banned. I can fit both in a single screenshot.

The deleted comment, which got me banned and publicly mocked by two of the sites mods reads:

Did I just get scolded by a mod for daring to express perfectly valid skepticism?

Bravo for undermining the credibility of the entire domain…

Exactly no one moved by this is taking it as a “subjective autobiographical opinion piece” but you, and only after citation was requested.

Expressly because of your response I’m even more doubtful of the story’s veracity with your snarky rush to defend it.

Allow me to be equally snarky: It’s only “autobiographical” if the person exists. If they don’t, then the word you’re looking for is “fiction.”

Now, the fact that I’m even reading this domain should objectively prove I have sympathy for the MRA community. And I totally do. I’ve written about it all over in many contexts. What you can’t find is hidden it because MRAs are hated worse than child rapists, when they aren’t simply asserted to be equivalent and I simply don’t have the courage to publish ALL of my opinions. Sue me.

However, it is pretty clear from the above exchange that while the MRA cause absolutely has merit its advocates are just as logically bankrupt and cowardly as their counterparts on the other side.

The post I’m commenting on in the image above is a very well written piece supposedly authored by a trans (female to male) man and essentially asserts that much of the MRA movement has a point which can not be seen until one is male. That may very well be true and I personally agree. (Though I feel that the fight for men’s rights is low priority at the moment, not because it’s fiction based or because it’s unimportant, but because there are larger more pressing issues and the opportunity cost is too high right now and that many of the issues are symptoms of deeper shared issues.)

However, I find it far more likely that the piece was written by a male with no exceptional experience beyond the realization that simply being a man invalidates his comments in the eyes of society. It’s a sad fact that facts don’t matter. What matters (somewhat) is identity. And I feel it’s likely he forged that for attention.

Essentially in the arena of rhetoric I assume people are lying pretty much by default. I feel this is healthy skepticism. And as such, I asked for some citation on this “Steven” so I could be assured that I wasn’t reading invented propaganda.

The response to my question as pictured above is astonishing.

You have been banned either because you have completely ignored the purpose of this site or for a violation of Comment Policy (derailing). [Ref: 10495]

Additional remarks:

I see what you did here. Manipulative shit hole.

So in response to the mod that banned me: “The purpose of this site” is apparently detached from any evidence, to the point that asking such a basic question as “is this even real” will get you banned and your comments deleted. Derailing? This post is 4 YEARS old. How is asking the simple question above not blatantly on topic? I guess if the topic is blind acceptance and cheerleading for what is starting to really look like a flattering lie, then yeah asking if it’s fiction is pretty distracting.

Sidenote: Manipulative? Is this a conspiracy theory now? I wonder exactly what I am being accused of.

So yeah, there you have it. Don’t EVER ask for even the most basic evidence from a red pill. It’ll only get you banned.

 

Root Your Own Brain

Free will may logically and physically be an illusion.

But there is another way that you are not the master of your own mind that is useful to know.

There are three huge forces at work in your body besides your consciousness. Probably others.

1. Your symbiotic systems.
2. Your enteric nervous system.
3. Your unconscious brain processes.

In order to root your own brain you currently need to spend a great deal of time learning how and implementing it.

Meditation, biology, neurobiology, lucid dreaming, neuropsychology, public relations.

The cost of learning to do so is high in terms of time and effort. However, realizing you aren’t (yet?) in full command has immediate benefits. And the concept applied to choices can carry you in a more comfortable direction.

You may not need to learn to command them, to make peace with them. This is the real source of ancient concepts like unifying “mind body and spirit.” A modern program of internal peacemaking is possible.

There are a seemingly infinite number of variables no question, but you may chance on solutions easily if you at least begin looking. And they might feedback. Gains empowering further gains.

I’ve noticed that my mood is best over the long term when I try to cultivate a concept of compassion for all the “people” trapped inside me. That sounds weird. Let me explain. I use people first of all just to cultivate compassion. If I say animals or systems or pets even, we tend to dial back compassion, that’s unwise. Also, humans are wired to relate to other humans, which means that a metaphor using hypothetical people is easier to process.

Now, the enteric nervous system is a living thing. It’s my guts. It feels things, it has nerves and does a lot of information processing. Having it is like being linked to a large blind and deaf pet snake. What and how I eat is really the only substantive way I have to be good to it. And I should, just generally, but also because when I am, it in turn is good to me.

There is a scientific basis for this:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-second-brain/

Every aspect of your mind also has a time element. It’s best to realize there is a past self, a future self, and a present self, and they all have links to each other. Your past self for example has made decisions which your present self is now dealing with. Your future self is making requests of your present self at all times as well. You will eventually be your future self so it’s wise to listen, however, you ARE your present self and it is the only self truly capable of feeling. You can’t feel the future until it’s the present. You can remember feeling from your past self, and memories themselves can cause feeling in the present self as well.

It sounds complicated but really it’s intuitive after you think about it and sleep on it a few times.

Why I say that brings us back to the people inside us. There are literally parts of your brain that are in a sense very separate from you. Like your guts, they can be thought of as organs and their feedback takes every possible cognitive form. The phrase five senses is extremely misleading. You actually have thousands. These thousands mesh to form your entire reality. Every modular and integrated bit of your sensorium is composed of sensations which are senses. They just aren’t direct linkages with the outside world. But they are built on that data and are thus every bit as valid.

Your sense of physical orientation for example is a sixth direct sense. Your time sense is an indirect one. Your sensation of proportion, the distance from your eye to your hand for example. And on and on. EVERY aspect of what you think of as reality come from these brain “organs” which aren’t always discreet organs. This goes to neuropsychology. You don’t need to understand all that to make use of it. You can just realize that you have a whole bunch of back brain processes going on all the time and they don’t all happen instantly.

Memory and learning require sleep cycles. Remember the compassion and people inside thing? Well, imagine there’s a second person, a second mind, trapped in your mind, and it only gets to be awake when you’re asleep. If you don’t give it good sleep it will be miserable, and it’s misery is partly your misery. Be good to it and it will be good to you.

Don’t let your future self tell you to pound coffee because you want career advancement for example. Being awake is a short term benefit anyway. Being awake or asleep right now is hardly ever worth having a lousy memory and being unable to learn things properly later.

My system of ethics is universal externally and it recently occurred to me that I should apply it internally as well. And just aiming the concept inwards fit and inspired this essay.

I feel like it could turn into a book almost hehe. It’s such a massive subject and I feel like I can parse so many elements of the human condition in this way usefully.

I feel compelled to point out why one can accomplish with a hacked or unified mind. Extremes of human accomplishment spring to mind and there are many, but really I think the most informative is Quang Duc and other self immolators.

We know, for an indisputable objective fact, that it’s possible for a person to train themselves to not feel pain. Not everyone can do this of course in their context. But it’s important and informative to realize that it’s physically possible and has a firm basis in reality.

I share that not to scold or inspire feelings of ineptitude but to inspire with a concept of what this line of thinking might be worth to you.

Earlier I mentioned a symbiotic system as well. By this I mean all the life that lives in you that isn’t even human. Most people are aware of the bacteria in their gut and on their skin but people tend to think of it as mostly a pest when in fact it’s a protective ecosystem.

There’s good evidence that your appendix and tonsils exist to provide shelter for beneficial strains of bacteria. Some hospital born skin infections can only exist because things done at a hospital temporarily strip away that skin based ecosystem.

Now again, some compassion applies here, not in the sense that bacteria can feel, (though that is debatable imo at the colony level: https://futurism.com/bacteria-can-use-electricity-to-communicate-across-species/) but in the sense that you can choose to be either mean or nice to your bacteria.

I think it’s unwise to take a genocidal approach. And the harm done by the overuse of antibacterial soap supports that. Extend and apply this concept where ever you can. Don’t be over zealously clean or filthy. The filth thing is a factor too. The bacteria aren’t very smart. They need you to manage their civilization basically. You can’t let it turn into a giant slum because that’ll hurt it and therefore you.

It’s important to point out that all this applies to other actual people as well. This is why altruistic groups do better than selfish ones.

The Apex

See also:

Avoid my Mistakes

Your Emotions are NOT Under Your Control

Issues Index

The purpose of this post is to give a reader and myself the ability to quickly match a given social issue with our position on it.

Issues to my mind can be roughly sorted by duration or scale. For now I’m going to generate two lists then, topical and general.

Topical Issues:

Trump’s Immigration ban:

Issue Position: Trump’s Immigration Ban

Trump Election Protests:

The Trump Protests Were Stupid

Trump Generally:

Trump’s Silver Lining: Big Reasons Not to Lose Heart

General Issues: (In no particular order as yet.)

Gun control:

2nd Amendment and Related Links

Prison:

Prison

School:

The Tyranny Of Compulsory Schooling

Kids:

The Final Underclass

Things every kid should know.

Universal Basic Income:

One Possible Solution

Nuclear Power:

Nuclear Advocacy’s Failure

The Drug War:
PR and Persuasion:

Ending and beginnings

That’s Why I Stopped

Avoid my Mistakes

The State:

An argument in favor of the state.

Issue Position: Trump’s Immigration Ban

Partisan position: Neither.

What I mean is, can I be labeled accurately in the popularly understood partisan sense to be in favor of or opposed to this issue? In this case no. My position is a little complicated. But generally I am opposed.

Why am I not entirely opposed?

Because I feel that Islam is dangerous and that it’s a good thing to limit exposure to it in ethical ways. I consider it a memetic pathogen that barring a more sophisticated response is best addressed now all things considered by way of quarantine.

Digital information channels should remain open of course but that’s because they are an entirely different style of vector, not because the information is any less dangerous.

Basically I consider religion a disease but grant that it is a person’s right to permit self-infection.

Why I am not entirely agreed?

Many reasons, most of which are obvious. Firstly because we already have an immigration process. Secondly, it ignores the real global exporter of terrorism, Saudi Arabia. Thirdly, it’s for the wrong reasons and it serves mostly as a distraction and a stress test.