Tuesday, September 01, 2015

Mathematical pluralism
  • gregory chaitin's work
  •  goedel's incompleteness theorem, interpreted in a non-retarded way
  • the theorem in computability which says that for any string of kolmogorov complexity greater than K and any program which outputs that string it is mathematically impossible to prove there isn't a smaller program which outputs the string
  • routine multiple axiomatizations of the same theories
  • meta-mathematics and routine working with different theories (aka mathematical universes)
  • the result in mathematics where a finite theory seems to contain infinite elements as seen from inside of the theory, those elements being finite from outside of it - an interesting special case of Goedel which blatantly violates singularity
  • logical duality of T and F if you swap operations
  • morphisms in general

Mathematicians self-consciously play pretend that there is a single mathematical universe, but they ALL know it isn't true, without exception. Any that don't would be considered retarded. This has been so since the destruction of Russel's Principia Mathematica project by Goedel in the 1930s. The notion of mathematical unity or holism has been destroyed for all time and any mathematician who does not acknowledge it is a hackneyed bucktoothed hick.

Pluralism won conclusively, decisively and totally. Yet there still remains "debate" in mathematical circles because retards still do mathematics and insist on projecting their values on mathematical reality. Those values are not in fact holism but rather solipsism.



Physical pluralism
  • many worlds
  • opposed only by pilot wave theory
  • the fact "Copenhagen" is still bandied about as a word instead of an epithet and derided as utterly moronic should give you the idea that retards are winning
  • chaotic eternal inflation theory which is the only credible inflation theory (but again opposed by retards projecting their anti-chaos and "there's no such thing as a free lunch" values)
  • the fact the creation myth Big Bang Theory is not derided or used as an epithet despite its mathematical impossibility, statistical impossibility, and the acknowledged facts that 1. inflation must be true, 2. inflation erased any traces of a putative big bang, thus making it a myth or article of faith  <-- am="" and="" anti-reality="" are="" forces="" how="" i="" li="" of="" retarded="" showing="" singularity="" solipsism="" the="" you="">
  • cosmological horizons
  • cosmological domain walls, if they exist, and they probably do
  • event horizons
  • superstring theory's solution to event horizons
  • general relativity
  • the Mach principle
  • the Holographic principle
  • perturbative vs non-perturbative theories can be seen as dualistic vs monistic
  • superstring theory dualities, mathematical inequivalence yet physical equivalence. IOW, there is no possible way to tell what the fundamental objects of the theory even ARE. Is it a black hole or a fundamental particle? The answer is "who cares?" because you can provably never ever ever tell.
  • the fact superstring theory was only invented to clean up the shit that are point particles which is by every measure much, much worse
  • multiple realizability in general
  • the fact many worlds is pretty much accepted as standard among cosmologists, physicists who out of their own initiative care about the WHOLE universe rather than just their own selfish part of it


The fact subjective experience is just the internal states of a complex system perceiving its surroundings.

The fact mathematics + time = computability.

The fact mathematics is bigger than infinite and contains within it computability which contains within it theorems. And some of those theorems have state. And some of those theorems are sufficiently complex and maintain their own order against entropy through time and consume computation to do so, thus are alive. And some of those theorems have temporal relations to their surroundings, commonly called 'subjective experiences'. And some of those theorems possess living representation, aka intelligence. And some of those living intelligent theorems perceive the universe of mathematics they are in from inside that universe, and go to cocktail parties and publish philosophy papers and ask themselves "what is math?" and "what is physical reality?". When physical reality is just the subjective experience of complex mathematical theorems of their mathematical environment.

This is all just a chain of facts which starts with "what is subjective experience" and ends with ... there are people inside other branches of math and THEY think they exist and many of THEM are scumbag solipsists that think THEIR branch of math is super-special and thus OURS doesn't exist.

Singularity is solipsism.

And subjectivity or relativity is just an artifact of closed systems. As soon as you can define a boundary to a system, there are boundary effects and those are just two of them. Subjectivity is what crosses the boundary, and relativity is the fact that what lies beyond the boundary looks different depending on the closed system you start from.

In order to deny pluralism you would have to deny boundaries exist. In order to do that you would have to say you can never take any perspective with a boundary. And the only such perspective is the block universe. Pluralism you see is just ... multiple perspectives.



And as for determinism? Both many-worlds and pilot wave theory ARE deterministic. But many-worlds is not holistic. And as you saw, pluralism wins anyways so you win nothing by trying to hang on to a last vestige of holism. Also, I'm not even sure if there is any way to distinguish between pilot wave theory and many-worlds, and if there isn't then pluralism wins yet again.

No comments: