My view are somewhat similar to [1]Arthur n the first two
paragraphs. I do not generally make up my mind until I must and
even then, I change freely when necessary: [although to be more
clear: "must" and "necessary" _should_ jump out at you for what
they really are: Wish. Want. Feel like it. They are not MUSTs.
They are not NECESSARY. Not SHOULD or OUGHT, although they COULD
have parts of MUST, NECESSARY, SHOULD AND OUGHT within it but
rarely exclusively] I reserve my frustrations with myself for I
wish to have perfect answers instantly available for any given
situation that will instantly resolve all doubt among myself and
anybody who happens to be within ear - or eye - shot. (as I'm
usually online). I do not always have that ability, so that is
where my frustration lies. I do not place it on other people.
They have their own journeys to take. Is the cat on the
outskirts of the reality? Perhaps. But I tend to believe the cat
is on the inskirts of reality. Close than the underpants. Within
the nervous system of the contemplating individual. Things are.
But our abilities to determine "What is" "isn't" "might" are
easily led and misled by logic. Evidence. Analogy. Numbers.
Metaphor. All can lead and deceive because facts are TRANSMITTED
things. Who is transmitting? Why are they transmitting? Are they
trustworthy? Discernment, unfortunately, is no easy matter. Your
smarter neighbor sometimes can't help you much. A committee of
elders sometimes can't help you much. You can't always help
yourself much. Your computer can't always help you. You
remember: "Garbage In, Garbage Out?" GIGO. That's that they
shoved in us (metaphorically) in computer classes in the 1980s.
GIGO. A computer gives answers only as good as the data going
in. You can have a perfectly running program. All the logic
works. It compiles. It runs! Hand-picked answers that always
work will always work. Normal cases will work and will always
work. But garbage can also go through the perfect logic as long
as it is well-formatted garbage and what comes out is still
garbage. Logically processable garbage, but still garbage. Now
[2]Peter Stanbury - I'm not saying [x] is good data or garbage.
I don't know. Not all information is life or death. Think of
eating: Most of what we eat is garbage. It turns into shit. Yet
within that garbage is something good. Our body uses what it
can. SOME food (information) is Doritos. Snack food. Popcorn.
Nuts. Candy. Salty. Sweet. Fun. If [x] is something that goes
through the logic circuits and outputs a pleasing result and it
turns out to be snack food that you LIKE? You're not actually
POISONING anybody with it or yourself? Then eat it. It's not
garbage. This is where GIGO isn't always correct. Maybe a
variation of FIFO: Fun In, Fun Out. [not First in first out -
that's another thing] Beliefs in possibilities that may or may
not ever be proven is part of the fun in theoretical physics and
areas that can't seem to fully be proven either way. Stuff in
the awkward or fantastical zone. Now, I happen to think a lot
that's come out of theoretical physics is candy. Fun. Salty
sweet snacks that are delicious on the tongue and fun for the
brain to ponder and enjoy. Yet, they don't hold much practical
value. They're fun. Practical theoretical physics is Standard
Model. We have all the answers we need for the moment to make
real stuff work and happen with engineering and chemistry.
Multiple Universe don't help build quantum computers but they
COULD work mathematically within the quantum computers to allow
for seeing possibilities that we wouldn't see otherwise had we
progressed purely constructivist and not using statistical
probabilities. By a similar token, bunk or debunk, myth or true,
there are certain curiosities that may or may not be true and
they are fun. They also hold practical value as they give our
imagination expansion room for possibilities in areas that
purely constructivist does not allow for on its own. So if [x]
gives your brain expansion room into the Unknown and curious and
it isn't harming anybody by such things, consider it your
"Possibilities Space". None, All or Some _could_ be true but the
truth values are less important than the extra dimension they
give you to work with, whether a literal extra dimension or a
figurative extra dimension. More room. Another piece of paper to
draw on that you don't have to hand in at the end of the class.
Doodle room. Sorry for nothing more conclusive than but we've
left conclusive-land and we've moved into possibilities-land
where things remain continually unsteady and uncertain. That's
part of their charm.
References
Visible links
1.
https://www.facebook.com/arty.drum.3?hc_location=ufi
2.
https://www.facebook.com/peter.stanbury.14?hc_location=ufi
