Submitted by ElliElephant t3_11ipi6p in philosophy
vegancookie t1_jb0ia1u wrote
Reply to comment by ElliElephant in Wittgenstein’s Revenge (this genuinely changed the way I look at the world) by ElliElephant
If humans didn’t exist, would gravity exist? Of course. If another species came along would they conceptualise gravity how we have? Unknown. It’s the same with maths. We have our ways of looking at the world, and decide how we are going to look at numbers (like what base we use), but this sadly kinda goes back to the whole “if a tree falls” side of things.
What use does maths have if there is no-one to observe the maths, to discover it? What use does gravity have if the universe became lifeless? It would be, but it would also be meaningless.
How we perceive maths, how we perceive gravity, the effects it has on us, is useful.
The concepts of maths only exist because we exist. Would the forces of the universe react differently if we didn’t exist? Probably not (in before quantum physics I don’t understand), but there wouldn’t be any concepts. There wouldn’t be any sense of a difference between a rock, a planet, gravity, light, colour, sound.
ElliElephant OP t1_jb0j7tz wrote
If the universe collapsed in on itself and was reborn in a new big bang which resulted in a universe with laws of physics completely different than they are in ours.. the value of π would still be the same. Even there’s no intelligent agent that ever calculates it
vegancookie t1_jb0jtfj wrote
There would be no one to observe pi. There would be no differentiation between any concepts at all, there wouldn’t be concepts. You need an observer for things to be observed.
ElliElephant OP t1_jb0lh8i wrote
Well quantum physics would suggest that absent an observer, there is no reality at all
vegancookie t1_jb0lsi9 wrote
Wouldn’t that be more aligned to my argument than your own?
ElliElephant OP t1_jb0me5j wrote
Possibly, yeah. When going thaaaat deep I can only guess blindly at answers
vegancookie t1_jb0px3l wrote
I did say originally “in before quantum physics I can’t understand” :p
ElliElephant OP t1_jb0s54u wrote
I don’t think anyone can. It seems like even to the physicists it is extremely awkward that our best, most tested scientific theory of understanding of the universe… somehow implies physical reality is directly effected by a conscious mind
vegancookie t1_jb0tvx9 wrote
Suddenly George Berkeley does not seem so silly!
ElliElephant OP t1_jb0v5p7 wrote
Woah, yeah, I looked him up and it seems like he nailed it
vegancookie t1_jb11b2f wrote
Ergo God exists /j
[deleted] t1_jb13064 wrote
[deleted]
IIILORDGOLDIII t1_jb1nsaa wrote
I think this interpretation of what "observation" means in quantum physics is generally rejected in the scientific community.
It seems consciousness is not a requirement for observation to occur in this context.
ElliElephant OP t1_jb1oeja wrote
Debated for sure. Scientists never imagined they’d ever need the philosophers’ help to do science, but they do
What does it truly mean to observe? And does it require consciousness?
IIILORDGOLDIII t1_jb2hg3u wrote
The definition of observation in this case is clearly defined and different from how you would use it outside the context of quantum mechanics.
ElliElephant OP t1_jb2ifw2 wrote
It isn’t though. There is no clear definition of an observation in quantum mechanics. That’s the only whole paradox of Schrödinger’s cat being both dead and alive. Is the observation when the instrument inside the box records the value, or does the observation occur when the box is opened and the value can be read? There’s no way to know
IIILORDGOLDIII t1_jb2ngal wrote
If a tree falls in the forest, the vibrations that our ears translate into sound occur regardless of an ear being present.
>As John Bell inquired, "Was the wave function waiting to jump for thousands of millions of years until a single-celled living creature appeared? Or did it have to wait a little longer for some highly qualified measurer—with a PhD?"
ElliElephant OP t1_jb2opvp wrote
Well yeah...that’s the million dollar question isn’t it.
If the universe objectively cares about life - or even more so - if the universe objectively cares about life capable of being curious about the universe..
Well, I think the profundity of the implications there is self evident
IIILORDGOLDIII t1_jb2qjq0 wrote
I think the big bang probably happened with or without any conscious observers.
ElliElephant OP t1_jb2r5fa wrote
🤷🏼♂️ That question goes above my pay grade
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments