• 1 Post
  • 299 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle



  • I lost a good friend a similar way. He insisted there was a global conspiracy to suppress “free energy” (over unity generators), among other things.

    My background allowed me to personally prove some of his arguments wrong from almost first principles. He then accused me of personally being part of the conspiracy. At that point I concluded he was a lost cause and parted ways.

    Most of his “evidence” was in YouTube videos. I went through a couple. It mostly had the build-up, explanation, consequences, and conclusions. It missed any actual evidence. It’s amazing how someone can fill 2 hours with nothing of substance.



  • I personally suspect environmentally caused ADHD could be a thing.

    Ultimately, if the treatment methods and suggestions help, I have no issues with it being treated.

    It’s also worth noting that ADHD (and sub diagnosis ADHD) are disproportionately represented in certain groups. My wife didn’t realise she had a problem till well into adulthood. Since she was diagnosed, over half her friendship group are either diagnosed, or in the process.



  • It’s also worth noting that ADHD, as a condition, is mostly a Gordian knot of maladaptations. Built up over childhood (and beyond). While there are a lot of commonalities, you need to do a detailed investigation to pick out what bits are a problem to the individual.

    If you’re going to go through that process, then you might as well not tie up an MRI machine for no reason.

    Drugs can treat the base problem, but don’t work well without the follow-up care to repair the behavioural damage.




  • cynar@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzbig facts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    The energy to spontaneously create a planet is vastly more than a brain. Then again, with the weird maths of infinities, it might play out.

    Though to recreate the full illusion would require something closer to the big bang itself.

    It’s well into the “here he dragons” realms of science however. Speculating well beyond reliable evidence.


  • Its more a problem with women’s cloths, but there are 2 factors in play. You make them bigger than the listed size and someone can suddenly squeeze into a smaller size. A 14 fitting into a 12 is a big dopamine hit, and so a powerful selling point.

    Counter to that, reducing material usage can add up. 1/2 an inch off every pair of trousers adds up. For cheap clothes this is a noticeable saving.

    Most men tend not to try clothes on in stores. This makes us dependent on the numbers. We react strongly to errors. This kept clothing makers fairly honest. That seems to be breaking down. They are trying the same tricks they use on women, and it’s annoying as hell!


  • cynar@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzbig facts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Our best ideas on the big bang put the universe as huge, but finite in space. (Way bigger than the observable universe) The question is time. If time is infinite then Boltzmann brains win.

    Matter has a finite life, energy differentials run out. Stars run out of fuel. Black holes evaporate. Even protons eventually fall apart to energy. Then there is endless emptiness.

    That emptiness would be finite in space, but infinite in time. Without that last boundary, weird things happen to maths.


  • cynar@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzbig facts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 days ago

    When the results are inseparable, then complexity is the only element, it doesn’t prove anything, but it does bias.

    Also, most gods don’t fall into this debate. Most gods would be quite happy interfering. This is (in principle) distinguishable from the null. It was aimed primarily at the simulation hypothesis. A perfect simulation is indistinguishable from a base reality.






  • cynar@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzbig facts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    If things are not all equal, then we can slice off a section of the axiom, and start dissecting it, via science. The axiom only applies if things are exactly equal.

    E.g. Gravity wave detectors have found oddities, just above the noise floor. These are likely equipment artifacts. They are also consistent with us being in a simulation, and us touching close to the resolution limit. If true (quite unlikely) then it would prove the axiom false.


  • cynar@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzbig facts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    The logic is that the universe of big bang matter has a limited lifespan. This sets a hard limit on the number of humans via “normal” means.

    Boltzmann brains are due to a quirk of quantum mechanics. Matter can come into existence spontaneously. The rate is proportional to the amount (technically the energy content). Given enough time and space, something that would fit the definition of human could spontaneously appear. The odds of this are unbelievably long, but, so long as it’s finitely large, in a true infinite universe it will happen an infinite number of times. It’s a bit of infinity Vs very large number weirdness.

    End result is that there will be a large but finite number of “normal” humans, but an infinite number of Boltzmann brain humans. Therefore, the chances of being an actual “normal” human is effectively infinitesimal.

    Agreed about it not mattering, day to day. It’s one of those things that is of interest to theoretical physicists, since it might tell us something interesting about the nature of our universe.