This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← LHC: Higgs boson 'may have been glimpsed'

bendigeidfran's Avatar Jump to comment 45 by bendigeidfran

Well, I can count to two.

Pretend you got 2 theories and you want to get to 1. Both work – that's how you got them.

You can't completely check 1 against fundamental reality from within it.

You can't have logic wrong, as statement or conclusion.

When an 'observation' is illogical, something is wrong, somewhere in the chain.

You're with me aren't you. You can count to two, and the rest is multiples.

You're not distracted by larger numbers, moon landings, or Hiroshima.

Now simplify – mere division.

Remove all multiples of observers and instruments (conscious or not), and you see you can't do it all with 1. One spacetime fine, 2 'dials' minimum.

If you've got down to 2, they're going to be incompatible. Or you'd have 1.

A GUT is ultimately circular, uncheckable, impossible.

You can't get 1:1 with ultimate reality, only nearly 1:1.

Read that very carefully. I'm a very 'special' person, and I've got a certificate.

Now remember we said when an observation is illogical, something is wrong, somewhere in the chain. Humans don't like that sort of thing.

We've spent a century adding links – magic at both ends – unsuccessfully trying to get to 1, because we forgot to check if that was going to be completely possible, because the scientific method works so well, all the way up to singular fundamental science, when you run out of anything to check against. I'm not sure what they were expecting to see when they got there, but I'd expect fundamental theories indivisible with nonsense on dials.

Now one end of the chain we managed magical consciousness. You can't really blame anyone before – Libet? - very hard to escape subjective reality anyway, and appreciate you're (not quite) dead. Just as hard as it was to feel the earth moving around the sun. So this end was accidentally 'fixed', and everyone agreed, and indeed most still do. The word's terribly unhelpful – I don't make the words up – remember words are made up, and may contain hidden extras. Compare life on any abiogenesis thread.

Nothing was more natural, than to keep looking the other end of the telescope, and try to solve the nonsense there. All the maths is fine – global correcting feedback loop – it's the same language they all used. Maths is accelerated words, nifty algorithms accelerated maths. But when you start from nonsense, things get very funny, very quickly, however clever you are.

And so we got magic mice, hidden dragons, many realms, and silly strings.

Sun, 18 Dec 2011 10:35:29 UTC | #900569