derekabutton

Connections Puzzle #166

🟪🟪🟪🟪

🟩🟩🟩🟩

🟦🟦🟦🟦

🟨🟨🟨🟨

Weirdest solution I've ever had

A

The table one refers the thing you add to the center of a table to extend it's length. I also hadn't heard of cutup or card but got lucky on that one.

I agree that it is a limitation of the nature of federated software. All the same, it makes me nervous to interact. I would feel much better if it wasn't every instance owner, but just the owner of the one your account came from, or perhaps the one you were interacting with. I'm not anonymous enough to feel comfortable.

I don't vote much on any posts or comments for exactly this reason. I wish it wasn't this way.

That new Golem game, unfortunately.

The post is the exact format chat gpt uses to provide lists. You are right on the money with this one.

Well Kelvin makes some math much easier. Formulas look pretty if you don't need to remove 213 a bunch of times.

You answered it yourself. Police policy.

I suppose this all boils down to whether true randomness exists. I am not of the notion that any divine pulls the strings, unless the divine is the true laws of nature. That is, not the map of nature that humanity can measure or describe, but the actual territory of nature and it's laws.

There is always some variation in results of anything we test because of the multitude of complex inputs the universe gives two situations. We can't know of any phenomena that has the exact same result twice, because we would literally need 2 identical universes down to the Planck. Quantum entanglement is theoretically able to impact particles across immense distances, for example. A mere solar system or galaxy is not of the proper scale to test this. That is, determinism cannot be tested experimentally unless humanity could control literally all variables in a system, which I cannot imagine as possible.

Many scientists have dubbed the unpredictable nature of subatomic particles to randomness, but as you mentioned with the map and the territory, I propose that the tools at our disposal simply cannot interpret these actions and their causes precisely enough.

It's one of those known unknowns that will likely be a question for all time. But as long as the argument against determinism remains that humanity doesn't know the territory - the true nature - of the universe and therefore can hope there is some randomness, I cannot subscribe to it.

I argue that randomness is excluded because it does not exist. I question how there could be choice unhindered by external factors. Where in our universe does true randomness exist? If we had two exact copies of the universe, and in both a die was dropped in the exact universe state down to the atoms of the brain, hand, table, cube, wind, etc., it would be the same result, no?

The fact that a dice roll is unknowable doesn't mean it was any less determined by the variety of factors that led up to it.

You ask why parameters would evolve in an unknowable fashion. That is simply because the universe is complex and there are so many unmeasurable parameters as you mentioned. No technology or knowledge could ever measure the state of all subatomic particles instantaneously. We aren't talking about a comparitovrly simple computer program that you can run twice and just get the same result. There are so many parameters that there is perhaps no number large enough to define it.

Yes, it has given me pause to reconsider, but I am no longer in my youth, and I have found no counterpoint in all these years that has turned me on the concept. The fact that children come up with the idea independently is just a testament to how simple the concept is, not evidence.

I do distinguish this from spiritual fatalism. Fatalism seems to be the concept that any path taken will always lead to a given destiny. I think I identify more with causal determinism, wherein there is only one path. In this way, I see the universe like an incredibly complex algorithm with an uncountable number of parameters. The state of the universe is based solely upon the previous state and the laws of nature. My "choices" are based on the many complex inputs of my past. If I was given the same inputs twice, including exact identical states of everything down to the atoms, for what reason would I expect a different result?

What are your thoughts?