The most worrying thing is that this “you” who is in some kind of “charge” is just a figment of your imagination.
And since your cells are constantly dying and being replaced, you isn’t even you anymore.
So I’m a countryball.
Or meat popsicle. But with hallucinations!
That depends on your view of what we are, I do not believe we are pur bodies and my opinion on that is not up to debate of you want to argue with me on it
I like the buddhist idea that our consciousness is what governs our mind, and our mind governs the body. Through meditation, you can start to see from the perspective of your consciousness, and not just your mind.
Is that what you are talking about?
The foreign bacteria in your gut had a much more direct audience with your brain than your cells do. Question is, is it an Embassy? Are they Diplomats? … or are they Oligarchs? >!As long as they call me sugar mommy for giving them sweets!<
To be fair, they outnumber your cells by something like ten to one.
I love democracy.
Drink a gallon of bleach and learn how much power you have over those little fuckers!
It cleans you out, but leaves you hollow inside.
My cells are dumb terminals and I’m their virtual server.
I have epilepsy so my brain gets DDOSed from time to time
Wow that’s a really apt analogy and I laughed way harder than I expected.
You should probably set up cloudflare or something for that.
Lol for real though, my ex had a seizure disorder. It sucked. There was a medication that they had her use for a bit, but it honestly made her so high for hours that taking the medication was worse than her seizures, so she stopped.
GO BACK TO CHESS CLUB, NERD.
Seriously can you guys just leave me alone? Chess is really cool, and you’d find that out if you just tried it. Sportz is dumb anyway.
Biology is complexity built upon simplicity. By asking this question, you are actually asking the same question philosophers and religions have asked for millennia: do we have a soul/free will?
No. If we are governed by the same forces as the rest of the universe, then even free will is an illusion caused by the myriad of interactions between the particles making up our bodies and the particles that make up the rest of the universe. If we could know the current state of every particle in the universe, we could accurately predict the future. Your destiny was set into motion the moment the universe exploded into existence trillions of years ago at the advent of the big bang. Knowing this not only doesn’t change the outcome, it was part of the design for you to know in the first place.
Or maybe I’m just high. 🤷🏻♂️
That’s determinism, a very popular and nice logical philosophical thought. Sadly, it’s completely disproved by quantum physics.
Is it, though? Every organ has its inputs, things happen and they produce an output (a reaction). Like the eyes receive light, physics happens and signals get sent to the brain. The brain also gets inputs from the senses and the states (memories), then physics happens and it produces a reaction, I don’t see where can we place free will here. Free will has to invoke physical signals in the brain, but where can it possibly come from? Even if the universe isn’t determenistic (and it’s not just our lack of understanding that makes it seem so), free will implies that there is another force (for a lack of a better word) that does complex social things.
Whereas I don’t see a need for free will, machines are capable of gathering outside information, processing it and making decisions without any free will involved, why would megamachines like human brains need it then?
Not with the many-worlds theory it isn’t
If we could know the current state of every particle in the universe, we could accurately predict the future.
Physicists already thought of this. The uncertainty principle forbids knowing a particles position and momentum to within a certain accuracy at the same time. Basically, the more you know of one, the less you know of the other. Applied to any two complimentary. variables.
Turns out, it’s a fundamental property of wave-particle nature of systems.
What you’re describing is a measurement problem.
Our inability to measure things today does not mean our future selves won’t think of some clever mechanism to do so.
Quantum mechanics is just math that feels right.
There is much we known that we do not known.
If you at least read the Wikipedia article on the heisenberg uncertainty principle, you’d know that’s not the case. Although physicists did think that for a long time was what was going on.
I’m not even trying to offer a counter point to whether or not free will exists or not. We don’t know the answer to that question. I was simply providing some context to what OP said, and how it is actually impossible to do.
I’m just a dumb dog, but I’ve never understood why we couldn’t predict the spin of a particle (or why its spin is important). Like… It sounds like a weird philosophical thing more than actual physics and, to my limited understanding, boils down to “we don’t know the truth until we see it.”
Which, I mean… No shit? Is there an easier way of explaining WTF it means in a practical application? Or is that really what it comes down to?
What mechanism actually makes knowing or accurately predicting this information about particles impossible that it isn’t just a measurement issue?
It’s because the concept of a particle having definite properties like position and momentum doesn’t hold in the quantum world. Until a measurement is made, the particle is in a superposition of all possible states but with different probabilities, these are described by its wavefunction, which encodes what the various particle variables (position, spin, momentum, etc.) could be.
So, it’s not a measurement issue that introduces the uncertainty; it’s already there as a fundamental property of the particle’s quantum state.
Measurements merely “choose” one of the many possible outcomes, collapsing the wavefunction and in turn making exact measurement of other complementary properties impossible (because the mere act of measuring one variable causes the system to transition into a new state with its own set of probabilities and uncertainties for all variables)
And because these are inherent limitations dictated by quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle, even if we could know the current state of every particle in the universe, we still couldn’t accurately predict the future because of that fundamental uncertainty.
Also, quantum mechanics is not math that feels right. It is literally the best most experimentally validated theory we have to describe the universe at this time.
Maybe some day we can do better. But it certainly isn’t based on a feeling.
Quantum mechanics proves that quantum mechanics is valid.
It is the mostly widely accepted interpretation but it is not the only one.
We’ve been confident before and spent centuries chasing literal ether.
The Copenhagen interpretation is just that, an interpretation.
We’ve chased it for decades and are no closer to resolving it with classical mechanics.
I’m sure future scientists to scoff our demand that there be an “observer”
It still cannot account for gravity.
The formulas pretend it doesn’t exist. It reminds me of a physicals 101 class pretending friction doesn’t exist.
Friction exists and so does gravity, therefore they are both pretend.
Thats not even true, we’ve been trying to come up with a unifying theory that encompasses quantum gravity for a while. This stuff is hard dude. And you don’t know what you’re talking about at all.
Trying and failing.
Is it not possible that it’s “hard” because we’re chasing the wrong path.
This isn’t something I alone think. You seem to be under the impression I have a less than Wikipedia level understanding of this. I do not.
This is true, especially if we’re correct about string theory since all possible outcomes are already determined. Only particles that have chaos can determine which outcome occurs without influence, but even these outcomes are pre-determined as chaos is its own finite variables such as a Boolean outcome of “it could do this or it could do that” regardless of influence.
This is effectively the premise of simulation theory—or very crudely put, the concept of “fate”—and the more we look to nature as inspiration for our own technology, the more we start having philosophical existential crises. It’s pretty cool 😄
But don’t fret! You and I won’t be around anywhere near long enough to see it figured out. Philosophy (and theory) it remains for now. Also, fretting would be theoretically pointless anyway since it was always that way and never in your control of influence to begin with 😳
Who is the “we” that’s “correct about string theory”, and what is “correct”?
Very few practicing physicists think it has any relevance as a potential description of reality any more. It has led to a lot of interesting math and gotten a lot of people tenure, though, which is tangible.
I disagree. I see it that Will is the ability of a particle or system of particles to affect change in the universe around it and alter the course of destiny. If we could know the current state of every particle in the universe, we could accurately predict the future, if nothing was then ever acted upon again. But particles possessing Will can alter their environment and effect a ripple of change that could then mean the entire prediction falls apart.
If particles have will; what is “will”, where did it come from, how does it work, and what determines it? Will would need to fall into chaos theory with infinite possibilities, meaning it’s fundamentally not influenced, there is no pattern, therefore “you” and “me” do not control it, meaning “will” cannot allow itself to exist. The only other outcome would be the concept of a soul, but then what determines that?
deleted by creator
Cancer is when they rise up against you, and your human cells stop being a part of a macroscopic animal and begin a new life as a species of human-dna-having single cellular parasites
My cells better fall in line or I will drink a bottle of draino and mutually destroy us all.
There’s that whole thing in “Dune” of “he who has the power to destroy a thing, rules that thing.” So yeah, we are in charge, even if we are fairly hands-off managers!
Ah, so it’s my constant suicidal ideations that are why I don’t have any real health problems… It all makes sense now!
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is more or less correct. Your brain makes decisions, your conscious mind creates rationalizations for why you did the things you did. The conscious, thinking part of you isn’t really in charge at all.
That was a really interesting article, though the implication does seem to be that you do indeed make some decisions longterm but that all decisions in the moment are basically automatic and rationalized later. If I decide that today I’m building a table thats a genuine conscious decision but the building of the table up to and potentially even including its actual design are probably falling back on automatic mechanisms.
Honestly doesn’t seem much different from muscle memory, riding a bike starts out as a very concious effort but ends up being automatic, it would make sense that thinking can be subject to a similar mechanism.
