2214 replies to this topic

[platypus]

Before physical resurrection which will require robots of astounding precision and complexity, we are likely to be able to make accurate scenarios of past events to the planck level.

So you think building a couple of robots is harder than simulating human culture to "the Planck level"? LOL

[Julia36]

So how are you going to solve the initial value problem? How will you "calculate" what Lenin discussed in some smoky pub, which then subsequently altered the course of history for example?

1. Quantum Archaeology is in the research phase. Much needs to be researched. If there were no unknowns if wouldn't be called research (Einstein).


2. If by 'the initial value problem' you mean variables there are zillions in the environment. If by initial value you mean the actual detailed description of a required final historical event, you calculate it from various other events which are either known (eg from the zillions of fossil and other records) or from trajectories derived from them.


It really is like joining the dots.

Instead of straight lines from one dot to the next which are all numbered in the game, ,

you deduce the parameters ( dots/ points/ configurations) by:

a) the nature of the previous event point

b) the laws of physics


Lenin & Hitler Playing chess:




can be configured by drawing trajectories perdition,retrodiction and adjacent event node densities, so you're coming at required destination before the event, after the event and from contemporary events.


Lenin had to discuss stuff determined ABSOLUTELY by his own description eg DNA ,PLUS the environment.

He could not discuss anything else.

Edited by stopgam, 24 December 2012 - 05:08 PM.

[Julia36]

So you think building a couple of robots is harder than simulating human culture to "the Planck level"?

I dont think we should get sidetracked by the Planck scale.


People are confused by the use of the word 'indeterminate' in the quantum realm. It does not mean that realm is not governed by laws, and in fact we can predict more accurately with quantums than classicals.

My own view of scale for what it;s worth (not much) is that we wont find a final smallest size not biggest size, but infinite regress will hold.

I dont mean building ordinary robots but the quantum robots ideated by Paul Benioff at Argonne National Laboratory in the 1980's. They have to build complex environments and will emerge at the smae time as the quantum archaeology grid.



Reconstructions of brains can largely be done with nanomachines, but to mine the quantum world we need quantum robots.

He conceptualized these as being small enough to enter the atomic world carrying quantum computers on their backs and adjust and construct in the Planck size.

the first quantum machine was only built in 2010 and it may be decade or two before we are near to doing tut a machine's design is integral to its environment. Much of their architecture will be drawn on nanomachines.


A few years ago I was lucky enough to hang about Shadow Robots which is a pioneering humanoid robotics lab in London, and saw what building robots takes.

Edited by stopgam, 24 December 2012 - 05:41 PM.

[platypus]

You don't seem to grasp what an "underdetermined problem" is. No amount of computing is going to save you from the problem with the initial state. Technology is not "magic" and laws of computation and physics still apply.

In other words, your points a) b) above are not sufficient, since you'll never know the initial state well enough to avoid deterministic chaos. How would you go on with measuring the initial state? Miraculously turn The Local Group (of galaxies) into detectors that measure everything and beam you the info FTL? How is that NOT impossible I'm asking you?

Edited by platypus, 24 December 2012 - 06:06 PM.

[Julia36]

You don't seem to grasp what an "underdetermined problem" is. No amount of computing is going to save you from the problem with the initial state. Technology is not "magic" and laws of computation and physics still apply.

In other words, your points a) b) above are not sufficient, since you'll never know the initial state well enough to avoid deterministic chaos. How would you go on with measuring the initial state? Miraculously turn The Local Group (of galaxies) into detectors that measure everything and beam you the info FTL? How is that NOT impossible I'm asking you?

Perhaps you will define 'initial state' and underdetermined problem'.


I dont have the answers that's why it needs research! Generally things thought intractable find solutions and we should procede nonetheless.

MOST reconstructions will be done in the classical world.

Simulations of the entire universe are thought possible and often discussed (wiki)

If they are possible local simulations are certainly possible.

I dont have enough knowledge to answer within your discipline. Generally I dont believe chaos exists in the sense that it is occurring unlawfuly.

Secondly underdeterinism, which is a new one to me, seems like lawlessness, which I think must be complexity.


The tools we have in the quantum world are only breaking, and our knowledge of what and how it exists are in their infancy.

It's not up to a philosopher to do the science and the technology: we've spawned the idea its up to others to make it work!

But pray instruct me on an underdetermined problem, how things can exist in chaos and what I should understand by initial state and why that is forever unknowable?

I think you are may be aware that science is striving for a theory of initial states?

http://www.damtp.cam...blic/qg_qc.html


If successful we may be able to run highly accurate simulations

Edited by stopgam, 24 December 2012 - 06:34 PM.

[Julia36]

Debate about the universe being a simulation.

Do you think the universe is composed of laws or not?

There is reashttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/24/universe-computer-simulation_n_2339109.html

[platypus]

I don't think philosophers should philosophize about STEM-fields (Science, Technology,Engineering and Math) without a solid background in at least one of them. Otherwise you end up with saying tons of things that are not even wrong:

http://rationalwiki..../Not_even_wrong

Edited by platypus, 24 December 2012 - 08:47 PM.

[Julia36]

platypus: I dont want to engage in ad hominem jousts.

the quantum realm is fascinating but largely unknown.
If you want to advance a philosophical argument or challenges/contribution to quantum archaeology, I'm your man.



"I'm telling you son we're gonna resurrect the dead!"

Edited by stopgam, 24 December 2012 - 11:02 PM.

[platypus]

.
If you want to advance a philosophical argument or challenges/contribution to quantum archaeology, I'm your man.

Pure philosophy is flimflam. I would be interested in a more scientific discussion on QA but I'm not sure if you have the tools to understand the related problems. Sorry if this sounds ad hominem but I don't see the discussion progressing at all. Merry Christmas!

[Julia36]

Pure philosophy is flimflam.

I dont know what you mean 'pure' but philosophy is the basis of all learning IMO, and is friendship with sophistry crafts, techniques (technology) knowledge (science) method and reasoning and numbers (mathematics
and everything else
You say this on a philosophy board.

It isn't about me or you platy, but about whether Mankind can resurrect his dead or not.

It take a massive debate in science to determine it.

But we can do some of the stuff now.

Merry Christmas to you

[Julia36]

coming soon!:





Recursive Civilization

Recursive civilization is one where the past, present and future interact.

<a href="https://sites.google...ttredirects=0">

It is a possible scenario in the run up to a technological singularity, mentioned in Quantum Archaeology which is attempting the science of bringing the ancient dead back to life.

A truly recursive civilization would not only recover people from the past who had died but also have interactive (different from specific time travel) where people live interactively in different eras as well as in different geographical places.

There are already people living in different eras in the same geography, but they do not communicate.

In recursive civilization, everyone from the past, present and future would interact, traveling to each other's eras. This raises many paradoxes, which may be solved by Many Worlds Theory.

People's lives seen in 4 dimensions

A possible result is that historical existence would become normal, with individuals choosing not to interact with some people and adjusting for rapid adaption to instantaneously changing environments.

We dont see our environments changing quickly (although they change) and ourselves are not yet modified to superhuman intelligences that could accommodate it.

Time zone were thought closed, but coming intelligent systems may enable crossing them

There are thought to be many dimensions and the possibility of living interactive lives in many may be viable.

[Julia36]

This is my position on Quantum Mechanics as an armchair scientist:


Neils Bohr (mysterious forces in the quantum) v Einstein (Causal but undiscovered)



It is said that the quantum mechanics rule even the classical world of men and panets.But physics isn't a one-way arrow.

The macro world MUST rule the quantum world as much as the quantum world rules the macro.

Probability is successfully applied when the units are too unknown and too small to measure.

Probability works. but it is an aggregate measurement, so I challenge WHAT is being aggregated, and QM does not know.

I will bet that we will find smaller events that act causally. (I bet $1!)

However as measurement gets smaller ad smaller eventually you can measure the events individually and adding these will give an exact unit and aggregate accuracy.

ENTANGLEMENT

Particles can get entangled. When separated they act in unison. This is very like magnetism, and magnetism baffled people when Faraday showed his work with electricity.

What is happening? I dont know the method for entangling particles, but recently 3 particles were entangled.

Why do entangled particles behave similarly? We dont know, but that causation is going to underpin it is pretty obvious.

see using

(entanglement for teleportation (including of people) at 40 minutes in on this video:

https://www.youtube....h?v=Nv1_YB1IedE

)

It is not enough (for me) to say OK entanglement happens and we dont know how it's happening, but to find out the laws that force it to happen, and I wager that forcing is by inevitability.
the position is astonishingly like magnetism pre-Faraday.

New fundamental forces may be working or things utterly different but they will fall to Cuase and Effect when we understand them IMO (I am entitled to an opinion, and it's as valid as 'hey it's weird' or God's doing it)

Edited by stopgam, 25 December 2012 - 03:27 AM.

[platypus]

Philosophy is too human-centered IMO. Physics and natural sciences are more fundamental and would still be useful even if Earth and the humankind were destroyed. Of course, the background-assumption here is some type of "realism", i.e. that there's a world out there that is largely independent of our existence.

[Julia36]

Philosophy is too human-centered IMO. Physics and natural sciences are more fundamental and would still be useful even if Earth and the humankind were destroyed.

says you!

Of course, the background-assumption here is some type of "realism", i.e. that there's a world out there that is largely independent of our existence.

That's the conjecture! we view anthropocentrically according to Joe Davis, artist in residence at Harvard & MIT.

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Einstein

and Steve Hawking:

"There is no picture- or theory-independent concept of reality. Instead we adopt a view that we call model-dependent realism: the idea that a physical theory or world picture is a model (generally of a mathematical nature) and a set of rules that connect the elements of the model to observations. ........
In our quest to find the laws that govern the universe we have formulated a number of theories or models, such as the four-element theory, the Ptolemaic model, the phlogiston theory, the big bang theory, and so on. Regarding the laws that govern the universe, what we can say is this: There seems to be no single mathematical model or theory that can describe every aspect of the universe. Instead, there seems to be the network of theories, With each theory or model, our concepts of reality and of the fundamental constituents of the universe have changed. "

he also said that debates about the nature of reality are poi9ntless....what matters is how well we can predict.

I think quantum theory predicts well, well enough for Quantum Archaeology to resurrect the dead. Most of the work will be done in classical physics, but if we get a unification theory (one may already exist but isn't known) it will include a continuum.

My guess is that we'll have the ability to raise and house 160 bilion people within 40 years.

[Julia36]

test

http://demo.vhost.pa...139169a4e347f01

[platypus]

Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman puts it well in his great book "Thinking, Fast and Slow":

"The idea that large historical events are determined by luck is profoundly shocking, although it's demonstrably true. It is hard to think of the history of the twentieth century, including its large social movements, without bringing in the role of Hitler, Stalin and Mao Zedong. But there was a moment in time, just before an egg was fertilized, when there was a fifty-fifty chance that the embryo that became Hitler could have been a female. Compounding the three events, there was a probability of one-eighth of a twentieth century without any of the three great villains and it is impossible to argue that history would have been roughly the same in their absence. The fertilization of these eggs had momentous consequences, and it makes a joke of the idea that long-term developments are predictable."

[Julia36]

Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman puts it well in his great book "Thinking, Fast and Slow":

"The idea that large historical events are determined by luck is profoundly shocking, although it's demonstrably true. It is hard to think of the history of the twentieth century, including its large social movements, without bringing in the role of Hitler, Stalin and Mao Zedong. But there was a moment in time, just before an egg was fertilized, when there was a fifty-fifty chance that the embryo that became Hitler could have been a female. Compounding the three events, there was a probability of one-eighth of a twentieth century without any of the three great villains and it is impossible to argue that history would have been roughly the same in their absence. The fertilization of these eggs had momentous consequences, and it makes a joke of the idea that long-term developments are predictable."

hello platypus,

I hope you had a good Christmas.

I dont understand enough of the Quantum Theory to pronounce on it and have modified Quantum Archaeology accordingly, thanks.


I dispute there was a 50:50 chance Hitler could have been female, but VIEWED retrospectively ---in THIS universe it was inevitable he was male.

see: BBC: Parallel worlds Parallel lives:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnnA3sgMXCI

The Many Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics shows that ALL possibilities occur, and that part of the quantum realm you type about is unquestionable deterministic by this interpretation..
.


I dont 'believe' the quantum realm is based on chance, but I of course accept probabilistic predictions which as you say are the most accurate in science: I also BELIEVE (hey, everyone has the right) that we will find underlying ABSOLUTE causation, though it may take super intelligent machines to work it out.

As we are at an impasse here, the only issue is

can quantum theory be used to make accurate predictions?

If so can it also be used to make similarly accurate retrodictions into the past?

Yup. It can. Better than classical physics as you say.

It just strengthens my case for Resurrecting the Dead.

In closed quantum systems, so long as there's no interference 9 eg no observer) retrodiction holds as well as prediction. (YouTube Stanford lectures on Quantum Mechanics)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1E3YJMKfA




ie quantum systems ARE reversible.


How does this affect chance?

What does Feynman's quote:

No-one understands Quantum Theory! mean.

Chance in science has been the term we have used to describe complex systems in the past.

Once they are known...ie the laws underpinning them are known...Chance disappears.

this was true for Brownian motion which Einstein smashed showing it was predictable though people thought him an idiot.


So we call quantum action chance because we dont understand quantum theory. I'm sure you're not claiming to understand it.

You believe the underlying world is chance fine. i believe its lawful and we dont know how yet..
Quantum predictions are BASED on prediction (sorry about the circle) and prediction is law.

Law is causation. no other law can be, including probability.

If you doubt that, answer this:

what is a law?

You'll soon find it is constraints and predictable reactions.

But that's my point....they have laws...whether you or I are right.

So we're left with does the quantum wold operate by chaos or or law?


Sir Roger Penrose said he didn't think the large and the small behave the same...ie they have different laws. Most people believe QT is random deep down so you have the majority on your side!



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

But the ONLY issue for QUANTUM ARCHAEOLOGY is can we reconstruct things that once were?

That is the whole basis of classical archaeology (in which we've been using carbon dating for some decades!)

In the UK archaeology is a specialist discipline not part of anthropology like in the US.



Here is the reconstructed face of George Washington using forensic archaeology::




It's not only about finding items & treasure, but about reconstruction




I'm trying to move it into the quantum realm by anticipating the vast computation power coming and I am sure because early findings there enable accurate probabilistic prediction,
we can raise the dead.

the first step is construction of the quantum archaeology gird

https://sites.google...rchaeologygrid/

Edited by stopgam, 28 December 2012 - 08:25 PM.

[Amichai Řezník]

This sounds alot like the Omega Point theory proposed by Frank J. Tipler.

[platypus]

This sounds alot like the Omega Point theory proposed by Frank J. Tipler.

Yes it does. Tipler obviously lost it at some point and developed with his quasi-christian teleology.

Edited by platypus, 29 December 2012 - 10:20 AM.

[platypus]

One should also consider that cosmic rays produce point-mutations in the DNA. As some cosmic rays are of extragalactic origin, QA will necessarily have to "simulate" all possible extragalactic sources as well. This BTW shows that quantum events have macroscopic consequences.

The idea of QA seems more and more hilarious to me - I simply cannot imagine a technical problem that would be more impossible than this one! Philosophers should take note that there are other categories of "impossible" than just "logically impossible".

[Julia36]

This sounds alot like the Omega Point theory proposed by Frank J. Tipler.

Yup it's based on it. The differences are the time scales. I think Quantum Archaeology will be viable in 40 years, Frank @ the end of time.

This sounds alot like the Omega Point theory proposed by Frank J. Tipler.

Yes it does. Tipler obviously lost it at some point and developed with his quasi-christian teleology.

I wouldn't get diverted by Tipler's Christianity. Life is suffering: he's at a christian college; a man has the right to his own eschatology/unfolding of events theory and also religion.

He's obviously a great thinker. At some point all our predictions wont even be in science fiction...they'll be beyond imagination.

QA is definitely futurist,

Edited by stopgam, 29 December 2012 - 08:42 PM.

[Julia36]

Opps my post got wiped.

platypus wrote: One should also consider that cosmic rays produce point-mutations in the DNA. As some cosmic rays are of extragalactic origin, QA will necessarily have to "simulate" all possible extragalactic sources as well. This BTW shows that quantum events have macroscopic consequences.

The idea of QA seems more and more hilarious to me - I simply cannot imagine a technical problem that would be more impossible than this one! Philosophers should take note that there are other categories of "impossible" than just "logically impossible".

It's the same argument which is archaeological gathering and RECONSTRUCTING (not the same and some of you chaps dont dig this) of data.

Only certain patterns could possibly have been, even with turbulence and chaos theory.
It could be true linearly that one result could have myriad causes. but that aint true when you construct dimension grids with multiple pathways.


QA is futurist. It cannot be contra science, but that doesn't mean everything in it is worked out. I'm argument that it should be researched.

[Julia36]

I wish you chaps would study the Many Worlds Theory of Quantum Mechanics, because it resolves some of the paradoxes and also is ABSOLUTELY determinist.



Partial trace as relative state. Light blue rectangle on upper left denotes system in pure state. Trellis shaded rectangle in upper right denotes a (possibly) mixed state. Mixed state from observation is partial trace of a linear superposition of states as shown in lower right-hand corner."




""MWI removes the observer-dependent role in the quantum measurement process by replacing wavefunction collapse with quantum decoherence. Since the role of the observer lies at the heart of most if not all "quantum paradoxes," this automatically resolves a number of problems; see for example Schrödinger's cat thought-experiment, the EPR paradox, von Neumann's "boundary problem" and even wave-particle duality. Quantum cosmology also becomes intelligible, since there is no need anymore for an observer outside of the universe.

• MWI is a realist, deterministic, local theory, akin to classical physics (including the theory of relativity), at the expense of losing counterfactual definiteness. MWI achieves this by removing wavefunction collapse, which is indeterministic and non-local, from the deterministic and local equations of quantum theory.^[49][50]

<sup>(wiki)

This seems really impoartnt to me?</sup>

[Mority]

Well, i think it doesnt matter whether the universe is deterministic or random. If it is random we simulate every possible outcome. if we do not know the laws of physics we simulate all possible laws. But that doesnt matter at all because even if every particle in the universe would be a supercomputer that calculates exactly what we want we still would have just a fraction of the calculation power we need. So this is mad... It might feel nice if you imagine it but the numbers just dont fit. I think playtypus is right. To do something like this we need INFINITE computational power. and even if we would have infinite computational power we would resurrect lots of people that actually never lived. There is no reason to beliefe that infinite computational power is possible at all.

So while immortality is very likely possible (The question is more like: will we get there and when?) quantum archeology is not. At least not in this universe.

(btw: we could just simulate every brain that can be arranged with matter. that would resurrect all poeple (and more, see above) as well. But this still needs unimaginable computational power. Nothing that could be archieved with all particles in the universe)

[Julia36]

Well, i think it doesnt matter whether the universe is deterministic or random. If it is random we simulate every possible outcome. if we do not know the laws of physics we simulate all possible laws. But that doesnt matter at all because even if every particle in the universe would be a supercomputer that calculates exactly what we want we still would have just a fraction of the calculation power we need. So this is mad... It might feel nice if you imagine it but the numbers just dont fit. I think playtypus is right. To do something like this we need INFINITE computational power. and even if we would have infinite computational power we would resurrect lots of people that actually never lived. There is no reason to beliefe that infinite computational power is possible at all.

So while immortality is very likely possible (The question is more like: will we get there and when?) quantum archeology is not. At least not in this universe.

(btw: we could just simulate every brain that can be arranged with matter. that would resurrect all poeple (and more, see above) as well. But this still needs unimaginable computational power. Nothing that could be archieved with all particles in the universe)

Hi Monty. Happy New year!



You have to be ruthless with objections to QA. One at once and not to mix them

It doesn't matter if QA resurrects or some other way. A raise is a raise!

Your MAIN objection is size of calculation..

That's common. You object that there aren't enough particles in the universe to calculate resurrections!

I'm not sure the universe is particles...waves are better generally, or even strings, but let's say events for physics' sake.


MY ANSWER

we can do maths symbolically - calculate and use massive shortcuts which slash factors down dramatically. Infinite maths and infinite computing are indeed viable.

Surprizingly people still fall for this error when estimating calculation.

RANDOM V DETERMINIST

I'm not sure you grasp what random is purported to be! Randomists dont just been complexity, they mean lawless eg 2+2 i= 3.09876876078634bvsu76t no it doesn't yes it does maybe poof its disappeared whoops it;s back as an elephant.

That is random.

Yo can have science and no law.

So if there is law in the quantum realm there is science and science is rules, knowledge facts, measurements. but above all, science is >>> PREDICTION>

[Julia36]

Thanks I've sorted the quantum world out now with some cramming from some clever dudes.

My position is this: superdeterminism is the case. Thanks for the prompt BTW .

Causation underpins the universe and @ a guess the multiverse.

A.I. will do it relax. We see through a mirror darkly.

Spot the odd one out:



In Quantum Mechanics it would be the moon, not the banana.

Do you understand it? No. No-one does. That's the whole point. Quantum Theory is science having its surreal phase. When the moon falls in a forest and no-one's about does it dance on the head of a pin with infinite regression but never reach the bullseye?

I reiterate the only thing that matters is whether we can build maths as technology to resurrect the dead and if we can it wil lbe build by cause and effect AND statistics (QM)




***In case u've just come in:

https://sites.google...e/qamadesimple/ <------START HERE****

Edited by stopgam, 05 January 2013 - 07:00 PM.

[Julia36]

From quantum physics to quantum mysticism to quantum quackery/insanity, can someone knowledgeable explain me why this seems to be so frequent?

daouda What's your science or philosophy challenge?

[Julia36]

[platypus]

we can do maths symbolically - calculate and use massive shortcuts which slash factors down dramatically. Infinite maths and infinite computing are indeed viable.

And you base that statement on what exactly? Wishful thinking and computational mysticism?

[Mority]

we can do maths symbolically - calculate and use massive shortcuts which slash factors down dramatically. Infinite maths and infinite computing are indeed viable.

And you base that statement on what exactly? Wishful thinking and computational mysticism?

That is exactly what i was asking myself. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There is no reason to believe that there is a shortcut that gives us infinite calculational power. This is not about quantum computers. Even a quantum computer that uses every particle in the universe is not enough.