Think of it as evolution in action. Nobody to steer and nothing to save anymore. While I praise anyone who would try to bring down to earth science for all of us either individually or together a risk and sacrifice without reward most often, on the frontiers some of them simply have no peers. This is very abstract, but not any kind of “generality of things” like what category theory does by describing regularity classes of particular systems that may go down to objects that look “natural” in a naturalistic sense. I was going to say that Humanity Should Steer the Future by starting a new religion, one that reflects all our finest values and rejects bigotry, hate and willful ignorance. We modestly imagine the future Yet ateleology and antiteleology are forms of teleology.
Idiots give him high rates, not that they love his essay, but because they love him. It comes across as ethically acceptable due to the voluntary nature of these “apps” should they be called brain apps or etc? Think of it as evolution in action. Despite of this, and that I rated 10 the other 2 above, we still have very bad ratings: As both a Jew and an Atheist, I nevertheless find in the teachings of Jesus Christ a model for humanity to follow if we really want to get along with one another and thereby survive.
We can make use of such insights and training regardless of whether we solve or agree on the ultimate status of “will”, “consciousness” etc.
About the FQXI essay contest on the math/physics connection
ffqxi The system is supposed to learn your preferences and recommend movies to you. Two parabolas, one larger and perpendicular made with flat mirrors can melt lead, but if we made lens to perfection for practical uses we would melt the pot.
Mind makes collapse before decoherence H. Hi Bee, I have read your essay as well as many others too, but to me, those essays are worthless but that doesn’t affect my ezsay process. As for my own essay, I address the issue of whether the human mind tends to end up properly prepared for steering a worthwhile future. It applies also to your imaginary travelers from future: Now eseay is amazing with the success of mathematics is that this spinor space E was found to be “what electrons and other fermions are actually made of”.
The scientists and which scientists? I confess, I am old fashioned. In reality we all are critical travelers TO the future. Newer Post Older Post Home.
Descartes did experiment with optics, mirrors and light. I think it would be faxi good idea to offer the organizing and reward services you describe in the essay. When the healers snakes entwine or the Ourobus worm loops to consume itself we all seem to know what the metaphor means for hope and that there can be a certain end by lack of belief in the Ivory towers of ourselves that risks the Neverending Story. The future is fundamentally not steerable.
I can see that his topic is popular with the crowd at the FQXi page for obvious reasons, but it doesn’t actually address the problem.
On the FQXI math/physics essay contest
On the contrary, scientific quality would be rather a handicap in this rating. Ultimately stupid and abusive crowds of biped animals cannot qualify. Then is also a clash between the cells of the Obscurantism column. How well does it actually work?
Open peer review does not work simply because most papers will never get any review. Ever more acccessible physical pleasures? But who is to say ten thousand years from now such travelers would find any of us monkeys worth saving?
I will have more to say about this, however, because science and technology also are changing the actions, the means.
Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: FQXi essay contest How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
The title of this post begs the question: Scientism Platonism Recognize with R. His proposition of open peer review, where anyone can bring a review, can be nice, as, for example, my ideas how to better explain maths and physics do not find place in the institutions just because it is not in essau usual official jobs of researchers to consider such things as changes in the curriculum, so I would need to find “peers” elsewhere.
One without incentive or use To explain how the concepts of “abstraction” and “generality” differ, I need to take a specific example.
I for one am not terribly impressed. Two parabolas, one larger and perpendicular made with flat mirrors can melt lead, but if we made lens to perfection for practical uses we would melt the pot. This is pure lack of imagination. Faith-based engineering is a perpetual test of faith.
Concretely, a big problem with a spinor is that its phase is reversed when you apply to it a rotation with angle 2pi. Such people usually hate mathematics because they cannot understand it, so they need pseudo-arguments to feel proud of their ignorance.
Because average humans who “care” often have a big bias for obscurantism i.