geordief

Same here ,but what if we ever did come to that assessment? How we we react psychologically to this finding? In the past when we assumed that we were the only civilisation it was a belief aided by gross ignorance of the physical universe Now our physical knowledge is greater and ,if we ever again decided that we really are alone ,as an intelligent civilisation in the universe it would perhaps be a different grander "aloneness" than our previous "aloneness" (which was really just a hybristic anthropocentrism that must now have had its day)

Yes ,too soon to make any such assessment but my question is whether we can say what such an assessment ,if it ever became compelling (never provable of course) might imply . If we could ever say to ourselves that ,in all likelihood no matter how far we looked that the only civilised life that ever had or ever would exist emanated from this Earth....supposing all that ,what lessons might we draw from that understanding? It is a sort of "suspension of disbelief" question as I ,personally am inclined to believe that other "alien" civilisations are there to be discovered whether or not we will ever actually do so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=899Wypv4rd0 There are very many planets that are capable of creating life forms but far fewer that have stable enough conditions to create sophisticated life forms. Is it possible that the life forms and civilization we have presently on this Earth could be the only such example anywhere in the observable universe? If that was to become apparent ,what lessons/revelations** could we draw from such an understanding?(would it be a deeper conclusion than from that there were other civilizations/cultural edifices elsewhere in the observable universe?) **not in any religious sense

I used to be good at languages.I learned a bit of Spanish just out of interest and was at a pretty basic level. Then I went to Portugal and worked there for a few summer months,also learning the language to a small degree. When that finished I came back through Spain ,taking about a week to hitch hike through the country. I noticed that the Portuguese I had learned had screwed up the Spanish I had previously had (they are pretty similar languages) I imagine that might be a common experience with closely related languages for some people. Edit: we have just started a "talking only Latin" thread over on another science forum as a way to perhaps learn or relearn that language.

Don't you need a theory of quantum gravity to square the physical event with the mathematical model? Events are very ,very small (like little Putina dolls) and ,as far as I know have not been observed directly.

Not sure how good it is as a practice but I wear a cheap surgical mask under a reusable mask I think that gives a tighter fit and keeps the surgical mask clean. I only wear it for going to the shops and am not sure if it would be comfortable to wear continuously for hours at a time . I keep the surgical mask going until it gets dirty.

If the craft had a very large mass it will take longer to accelerate to very high speeds (unless ,perhaps it can be given an initial launch using a land or moon based laser) But when it needs to decelerate, could something like 99% or more of the total mass be disconnected from the spacecraft and used to slow down the very small payload quite quickly? Could the disconnected mass be made to emit a laser beam at the sails? Edit:might it make sense for the craft to be launched from a conventional spacecraft that was already travelling at its maximum speed relative to the Earth?And for that spacecraft to fire lasers at the sails of the departing craft...

You could argue that someone with a faith or a strong belief would be less likely to ask questions(,or pose different questions) that might put those biases in question. That would make him or her potentially a worse /lesser scientist (but still a scientist)

https://www.vice.com/en/article/78kqjq/the-smallest-radio-receiver-ever-is-made-from-imperfections-in-diamonds I was wondering if this kind of an object might be small enough to be accelerated to relativistic speeds and whether (in that unlikely event) it might be possible to monitor any distortion in the signal due the receiver moving wrt to the source at high speeds.

So why doesn't that apply to religious upbringing? There can be degrees of brainwashing Some are also "teeny tiny", some are all invasive and oppressive. Religious belief is an integral part of society . We all need to be informed as to its characteristics

Are we all indoctrinated because we listen to an advert on the radio or see a billboard by the road?

Don't see the relevance to my posts. Maybe the OP might find it relevant . I don't know. (not looking for rabbit holes today)

You may be right.I was once buttonholed by Scientologists in the street with the psychology profile questionnaire they used to entrap the incautious . Anyway the result/interpretation of it was apparently that I see the/my world as better than it is. "Frightened of living" is how I see myself but that is way off topic .....

How would you feel if death was not associated directly with illness but that our consciousness was programmed to "blink out" painlessly at a random time as we were going about our daily existence? Would it seem more likely that the conciousness would be somehow recycled if that happened without all the drama we and our fellow sentient beings undergo towards the end of our lives? People often say that they don't mind dying but don't want to be there when it happens

I assume the OP may have been implying that 2 "identical" people might exist and that an observer might , in principle be able to ascertain that they were in fact the same. Memory would not come into it ,but they would of course have to have the same ongoing memories and that would be impossible unless their entire espective universes were also identical in every respect

If you could find a way past @swansont 's obstacles (which I agree with) what consequences might follow? Also are there any ways one might ascertain whether in the past or in the future two systems - living or non living - had separately evolved to be (and continued to be) identical? What if one restricted oneself to the timespan and location of the solar system? Is there an infinitesimal chance that two or more systems of any size could have evolved to be ,and continued to be identical?

Thanks for the suggestion.I will look into it.Books are another approach for sure.A pity I now find them so hard to use.Even so they can be very pleasurable.

I like that description.Would that be the consensus view,or are there other widely held interpretations?

This is completely new to me . It seems to be very important. It counts as an interaction ,doesn't it? Again I was blissfully unaware of plane waves ;even polarized light I have not too well assimilated as a phenomenon

As in "does the wave interact with them" (their edges) ?Does it cause decoherence (am just learning to use that word)? ps I don't think I have any hangups about human or sentient observers -they are all just interactors to me at my present stage of understanding.

What about the slits? Are they detectors too?

I have been told that the consensus has for some time been that the universe should be flat (because it should be infinite) This measurement of a lack of observable curvature in the triangle drawn between us and the edge of the observable universe is just a confirmation of this "bias". We think the universe should be infinite and this measurement apparently lends real credence ,though not proof to this view.

No,just trying to keep up with the conversation as much as I can.

I would like to hear what Studiot has to say about the book ,whether specific examples or just how it illustrates the point he was making.

What does it say about the way quantum phenomena transition to classical phenomena ?(if I have caught the gist of what you are saying)