Is The Uncertainty Principle Incompatible With Determinism?

Speak for yourself. My comment was not directed at any person but the impractical nature of the exercise. It doesn't tell you how to arrive at that understanding. Are you going to enter the discussion? are are you going to pout.

 

How can you call the forms that come before "determined" per se, though. The forms exist, first and foremost, and you can't just label existence "determined" because many things seem to follow an absolute path. Imagine if time stopped and started again -- would everything still be determined, or would everything include that misfortunate moment when time stopped.

I don't see how a true statement can be meaningless. I can see where you might get confused about whether or not parts of reality can technically be called reality itself. After all, I don't think the atom is unreal. But it's true that the act of observation seems to have some meaningful impact on the physical structure of the universe. Is it just some strange subatomic wind causing these alterations before our eyes or mustn't we take it that the distinction between us and our environment has officially become blurred.

 

http://www.iflscience.com/physics/measurement-rules-quantum-universe

 

You and I are the same dope.

I AM speaking for myself.

Don't you see that you're talking into a mirror?

What you see is what you are.

 

"Reflection is rarely seen across the surface of the looking Glass."

-Mos def

 

you sound like a slipperman....

I've never seen a stranger crowd
Slubberdegullions on squeaky feet

Continually pacing
With nonchalant embracing
Each orifice disgracing
And one facing me moves to say, "Hellay"

His skin's all covered in slimy lumps
With lips that slide across each chin
His twisted limbs like rubber stumps
Are waved in welcome say, "Please join in"

My grip must be flipping
'Cos his handshake keeps slipping
My hopes keep on dipping
And his lips keep on smiling all the time

We, like you, have tasted love
Don't be alarmed at what you see
You yourself are just the same
As what you see in me

Me, like you? Like that?
You better watch it son
Your sentence has only just begun
You better run and join your brother John

 

it's not necessary for the observer be conscious though .. so long as it leaves a permanent effect as a result, irrevocable evidence of the collapsed state.

 

I'm looking at the words which are not the same and have distinctions. You are taking something personal which is common. Inserting an attitude into the dialogue which is not intended or written. what you see is what you say is there. That is why it is important to understand what you are saying and how to apprehend without prejudice.

 

The gene times your physical development.

 

Though your fingers may tickle, you'll be safe in our pickle...

 

Its all just gobbity gook. You aren't really making sense

 

It is necessary to have a platform to observe from. Any body will do.

 

Can you read? i can't make your sense for you. You cannot appreciate what you have already judged unworthy.

 

Firstly, you must understand that the distinction between yourself and others is not visible to us. We do not consider that a separation exists between the consciousness-raising efforts of the distortion which you project as a personality and the distortion which you project as an other personality. Thus, to learn is the same as to teach unless you are not teaching what you are learning; in which case you have done you/they little or no good. This understanding should be pondered by your mind/body/spirit complex as it is a distortion which plays a part in your experiences at this nexus.

Group-individuated consciousness is that state of sharing understanding with the other distortions of mind/body/spirit complexes, which are within the evident reach of the mind/body/spirit complex individual or group. Thus, we are speaking to you and accepting both our distortions and your own in order to enunciate the laws of creation, more especially the Law of One. We are not available to many of your peoples, for this is not an easily understood way of communication or type of philosophy. However, our very being is hopefully a poignant example of both the necessity and the near-hopelessness of attempting to teach.

Each of those in this group is striving to use, digest, and diversify the information which we are sending this instrument into the channels of the mind/body/spirit complex without distortion. The few whom you will illuminate by sharing your light are far more than enough reason for the greatest possible effort. To serve one is to serve all. Therefore, we offer the question back to you to state that indeed it is the only activity worth doing: to learn/teach or teach/learn. There is nothing else which is of aid in demonstrating the original thought except your very being, and the distortions that come from the unexplained, inarticulate, or mystery-clad being are many. Thus, to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make. We can speak no more valiantly of your desire to serve.

 

The thing that holds down distortion in this instance is the static symbol we can refer to. the word. We speak our mind and our mind is revealed. Look at what you say the terms are all right there. You are the authority of all things. If you are confused or self contradictory in speech, then you haven't located your authority. There is no mystery in finding representation of yourself.

 

The statement is meaningless considering the meaning of each word. One of the things that we don';t do with efficiency is consider every word of every conversation. Reality cannot be more than one thing or we have no basis for coming to common terms. An axiomatic progression has to start with a point that displays itself as self evident to all.

 

True statements are true distinctions, the same or different. we confuse telling a story consistent with it's own paradigms which is a true story with making ongoing true distinctions.

 

Your (human) language, using vibrational sound complexes, can be at best an approximation of that which is closer to an understanding, if you will, of the nature of conscious thought. Perceptions are not the same as sound vibration complexes and the attempt to define will therefore be a frustrating one for you, although we are happy to aid you within the limits of your sound vibration complexes.

 

You can't even tell a consistent story if all the elements in a single sentence are not consistent.

 

Words were first spoken then language was developed. these words are primal emissions that have been given character with the consonant. Experiential conjugations of feeling and utterance. We have built a file of these conjugations and they are true to form true representations. even so all forms can be altered. It is not helpful to claim we exist in separate estates.
Vibration in it's most active state is luminous. We speak a language we can see.
As far as potential frustration reality supports it's constituents.
That is why I appear patient. Nothing opposes me. We cross paths.