Comment on Multiverse

• pcalau12i@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  There’s still a pattern in the results, so by one means or another we want to explain the results. Just calling it nondeterministic, if I understand right, would be just saying you can’t predict it from prior observations. So, whatever language you use to describe this puzzling situation, the puzzling situation thus far remains.

  I mean nondeterministic in a more fundamental sense, that it is just genuinely random and there is no possibility of predicting the outcome because nothing in nature actually pre-determines the outcome.

  A priori?

  Through rigorous experimental observation, it’s probably the most well-tested finding in all of science of all time.

  Or because it best fits with Relativity? It sounds about as strong as saying, “we know time is universal.” It’s obvious, has to be true, but apparently not how the universe functions.

  So we can never believe anything? We might as well deny the earth is round because people once thought time is absolute now we know it’s relative, so we might as well not believe in anything at all! Completely and utterly absurd. We should believe what the evidence shows us. We changed our mind about the nature of time because we discovered new evidence showing the previous intuition was wrong, not because some random dude on lemmy dot com decided their personal guesses are better than what the scientific evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates.

  If you think it’s wrong show evidence that it is wrong. Don’t hit me with this sophistry BS and insult my intelligence. I do not appreciate it.

  source

  • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I think you’re getting angry at the wrong things and taking me too far. I didn’t at all mean we can’t believe or trust physical reality. Neither do I doubt special relativity, or specifically the Lorentz invariance.

    I wasn’t meaning to insult your intelligence, but now I feel you’ve done that for me.

    source