In nearly twenty years of blogging, I’ve unfortunately felt more and more isolated and embattled. It now feels like anything I post earns severe blowback,It appears that I am blocked from commenting there. The following was rejected, so I repost it here:
(7) Goldbach is not a good example because if it is independent of the axioms then there is no counterexample in N, and hence true in N. There are other arithmetical statements that are independent and we have no reason to say they are true or false. "how did we even get started talking about math?" By accepting what is provable. Mathematicians do not need to have an opinion, when there is no proof.Yes, I do think his math philosophy, and his many-worlds beliefs, are untenable. In particular, it is a nutty extreme view to say that many-worlds is scientifically conservative.(15) "Everett interpretation ... to result from scientifically conservative choices." By this I assume you mean you can use the Schroedinger equation to predict probabilities, but then reject those probabilities and interpret them as world-splittings instead. No, this is not scientifically conservative. It makes the theory untestable, and introduces vast unobservable worlds.
Sean M. Carroll says that same thing, and I have criticized him for it. He has explained his views in detail on his podcast, so I am sure he is wrong.
The essence of many-worlds is that it takes a scientific theory that predicts probabilities, denies that probabilities exists, and postulates that all possibilities happen in parallel worlds. It is so crazy that any scientist who advocates it should be disregarded on all scientific issues.
Aaronson tries to make his other positions sound moderate, but some are nutty. Item (1) exhibits Trump Derangement Syndrome. He thinks Trump is a threat to the Enlightenment!
He is entitled to his political views, of course, but nothing he says about Trump makes any sense. Some of his viwes seem more aligned with Trump than Harris, except for his Jewish brainwashing against Trump. I say Jewish because a lot of Jews show the same derangement, even though Trump's policies are likely to be much better for the Jews.
Harris and Walz are the most vacuous candidates I can remember. They have low IQ, have nothing to say about anything, and just babble nonsense when asked questions. Surely anyone smart enough to be a professor can see that they are morons. They just support them out of some sort of leftist tribal loyalty.
Anybody who invokes a 'probability' as a parallel universe clearly has no idea what they are calculating.
ReplyDeleteYou can not demonstrate how one might even detect a single parallel universe, much less what goes on in one, much much less an infinite number of them, or how one might elide from one such imagined universe to another. This is just black box science ad infinitum based on mere hand waving.
A single drop of skepticism can dispel a mountain of bullshit.