Great point, but I see both sides and to rule out consciousness playing a role definitevely would be claiming you've resolved the many conflicting but valid interpretations of quantum mechanics. Ie. The Von Neumann-Wigner interpretation posits a need for consciousness.
-
-
Also there is and probably never will be a "consciousness" variable despite the fact that we experience it permanently. It's likely a complex emergent phenomena arising from the actions of trillions of more simple information processing units and the particles theyre made of.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Deepneuron @HerbertHitchens
The term emergence is a cop out. Temperature comes from jostling around of molecules. We have models for this and simulations that take us from the microscopic to macroscopic. Therefore just because it’s emergent doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be able to describe that emergence.
3 replies 2 retweets 5 likes -
-
It's still not a copout regardless of what one person might think
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Perhaps I should clarify. Using the term "emergence" without an explanation of that emergence is no different than saying "pixie dust"
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Dillon Wins. *Mortal Kombat Voice*
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
lmao now you're just trolling
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I'd never do that! You the man Dillon! greatly appreciate the work you do. You are a lot more helpful than any of the "professors" at my state Uni.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Well thanks I really appreciate that
4:48 PM - 27 Jan 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.