Collatz_problem [comrade/them]

I’m so tired of peeing. I drink the water I apparently need to survive. Then I have to go put the water somewhere else 5 minutes later. I drink water, I wash my hands, I leave, then I need to drink MORE water. Guess where that water ends up? Not in me! I give the water to my body and then like a child it tosses it out and demands more. All hours of the day and all hours of the night no matter what I am doing my life is interrupted by piss and this bullshit.

In WW1 pretty much everyone was bad guys.

I wish all American aircraft a lot of “Attention! Thermal signature detected!”.

Ideas are more powerful than weapons. They don’t want their enemies to have weapons, why would they allow them to have ideas?

Does this paper talk about minors?

USSR also built an experimental power plant of this type. Sadly, it was closed and disassembled after the breakup of the Soviet Union.

It’s really hard to put it into an actual algorithm. I usually skim the paper at first to get the general thread of thought and then look closer to get it in detail.

EU is unable to beat the shit out of countries that insist on using other currencies.

I’ve given a basic list of red flags in the previous comment.

I’m a mathematician, worked a little on research on quantum computing in university before I bailed out and started working as a programmer, had courses on the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics in university. These papers make an alarm sound in my head that the author is a crank and not a real researcher, because they are very wordy with little actual content, use mathematically-sounding definitions that are then used nowhere, do not describe actual algorithms used in experiment in the second paper, make extraordinary claims while not giving any concrete explanations on how the author arrived at them and so on. I’ve written reviews on a couple nonsense papers like that, when my thesis advisor assigned them to me, so the general feeling was familiar.

Looked at the paper and now I’m completely sure that the author is either a schizo or a fraud. This paper claims to explain relativity, quantum mechanics, cosmology and even life and consciousness, does not provide anything to that effect except barely math-flavoured bullshit and it is painfully obvious that the author does not understand relativity or quantum mechanics beyond school-level summaries. I checked the author’s website and it is a weird one-page website that is not reassuring at all that the author is a serious researcher and not a hack.

I’m very suspicious about how they converted EEG results to “consciousness states”. They declared that they correspond to brain waves (which is already an extremely strong claim, which they didn’t care to justify), but didn’t explain, how they chose one at every, when humans normally have several brain waves simultaneously. Looks like the weakest place in the setup, even if we assume good faith. And there is also the question, why the participants thinking really hard should affect their quantum computation and not other people, who are much closer.

After a cursory look, it seems that they argue that people who thought really hard in Japan affected quantum computations in United States with pretty significant correlation, and people who received their training got even higher correlation.

My bet is that they made it up either completely or through extreme data mining like what consciousness state they select for each moment and so on. Even completely legitimate experiments with quantum teleportation get much lower rates of success. And their definitions of subjectivity and consciousness are math-flavoured bullshit and not something meaningful. I don’t think there is anything remotely valuable in those articles.

I didn’t see any experimental approaches suggested in the paper.

And it is pretty obvious that the author doesn’t really get why the theory of relativity and the quantum theories are so at odds with each other.

So in general I think it is a load of (philosophically) idealist bullshit.

I’ll be honest, sounds like useless bullshit with zero actual applications.

We live in a steampunk timeline, everything must boil water.

Isn’t this like the whole discussion about interpretations of quantum mechanics with probabilistic interpretations vs many-worlds interpretations vs “shut-up-and-calculate” “interpretation”?

There is no need for the detector to explain anything. The very process of measurement collapses the wavefunction like most of interactions do. Measurement is not special, it collapses the wavefunction simply because you have to interact with particle to measure its properties. Observation is just a convenient word, which tends to muddy the understanding of laypeople.

Observer in quantum mechanics is just a measuring tool, not a conscious being. In the double-slit experiment the observer is the detector, not a physicist. There is no need for subjectivity here.

They can turn it back on. Or they can apply some rubber-hose cryptanalysis.