Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Why does the idea of no Free Will bother some people?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6048700" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>Eh, I don't think that flies. Plants have ways of sensing the universe around them, too, but they aren't generally considered sentient.</p><p></p><p>Fact is, there's more than one definition of "sentient". Some say it is "having senses". Others would say it is "having subjective sensory impressions". Yet others would say it is "being conscious of having sensory impressions". Seems the jury's still out on a precise meaning. So, I think we'll have to settle on having our own meaning in this context.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Too late <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /> That's okay, though. Science discussion generally requires a bit of nitpicking.</p><p></p><p>But note how "human-level" has not really been part of the discussion yet. You may be being more precise, but we're still being vague, mostly intentionally, I suspect. I, personally, am not sure mentation is like D&D character advancement, with levels one clearly "above" another. That's akin to the old "ladder" view of evolution, which these days seems pretty outmoded.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure what you mean by "things move from". Individual things rarely start in one scale to the other - an electron is an electron, and it never goes from being quantum scale to macro scale. If you mean, "as our observations move from looking at quantum-scale to macro-scale," then... almost, yes. Surely, macro-scale objects don't usually have discernible quantum nature.</p><p></p><p>However, there are some macro-scale things that have quantum properties - Superconducting QUantum Interference Devices (SQUIDs - really sensitive magnetic field sensors), Schrodinger's cat, and a few others. In the scenario I just described, the questionable aspects of such item is best described in quantum terms. It is only after it interacts in a relevant way with a macro-scale object, such that it has to resolve for the universe of the macro-scale object to make sense, then it resolves.</p><p></p><p>The box of Shrodinger's cat is "interacting" with the table it is sitting on, but that's not enough to resolve the state, because the table's universe makes sense so long as the box is closed. It is only when the box opens that the rest of the universe would have issues with this alive/dead cat, so the system resolves. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. In the "observer required" model, there's two basic possibilities:</p><p></p><p>1) There is some Prime Mover who does the initial observation. Like you, many find this problematic.</p><p></p><p>2) As the waveform(s) of the Universe evolves, the probability of sentient minds existing in the Universe increases. If the probability of there being sufficient sentience to act as an observer ever reaches 100%, then the Universe as a whole resolves, history and all. Rather like human free will arising by self-observation, the universe kind of observes itself, and there we are! This is a very "anthropic principle" kind of universe.</p><p></p><p>Many folks *really* don't like the mumbo-jumbo there, which is why the "quantum/macro" interpretation arose.</p><p></p><p>I do have to make this clear - we are in the realm of interpretations of quantum mechanics, not in the realm of proven science.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6048700, member: 177"] Eh, I don't think that flies. Plants have ways of sensing the universe around them, too, but they aren't generally considered sentient. Fact is, there's more than one definition of "sentient". Some say it is "having senses". Others would say it is "having subjective sensory impressions". Yet others would say it is "being conscious of having sensory impressions". Seems the jury's still out on a precise meaning. So, I think we'll have to settle on having our own meaning in this context. Too late :p That's okay, though. Science discussion generally requires a bit of nitpicking. But note how "human-level" has not really been part of the discussion yet. You may be being more precise, but we're still being vague, mostly intentionally, I suspect. I, personally, am not sure mentation is like D&D character advancement, with levels one clearly "above" another. That's akin to the old "ladder" view of evolution, which these days seems pretty outmoded. I'm not sure what you mean by "things move from". Individual things rarely start in one scale to the other - an electron is an electron, and it never goes from being quantum scale to macro scale. If you mean, "as our observations move from looking at quantum-scale to macro-scale," then... almost, yes. Surely, macro-scale objects don't usually have discernible quantum nature. However, there are some macro-scale things that have quantum properties - Superconducting QUantum Interference Devices (SQUIDs - really sensitive magnetic field sensors), Schrodinger's cat, and a few others. In the scenario I just described, the questionable aspects of such item is best described in quantum terms. It is only after it interacts in a relevant way with a macro-scale object, such that it has to resolve for the universe of the macro-scale object to make sense, then it resolves. The box of Shrodinger's cat is "interacting" with the table it is sitting on, but that's not enough to resolve the state, because the table's universe makes sense so long as the box is closed. It is only when the box opens that the rest of the universe would have issues with this alive/dead cat, so the system resolves. Yes. In the "observer required" model, there's two basic possibilities: 1) There is some Prime Mover who does the initial observation. Like you, many find this problematic. 2) As the waveform(s) of the Universe evolves, the probability of sentient minds existing in the Universe increases. If the probability of there being sufficient sentience to act as an observer ever reaches 100%, then the Universe as a whole resolves, history and all. Rather like human free will arising by self-observation, the universe kind of observes itself, and there we are! This is a very "anthropic principle" kind of universe. Many folks *really* don't like the mumbo-jumbo there, which is why the "quantum/macro" interpretation arose. I do have to make this clear - we are in the realm of interpretations of quantum mechanics, not in the realm of proven science. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Why does the idea of no Free Will bother some people?
Top