The Time-Aware Counterfactual and the Discussion over Red Wine

If there were ever a more conducive element to deep discussion, red wine takes some beating. I shared a glass or two or more with my friend Angela tonight, which is causing a few porobelmes with hitting the right keys to type this Blog, but was nevertheless noteworthy in terms of the detail. When I came home I was treated to find that Dr Phil Metzger had posted a couple of Tweets back to me in relation to the realism of quantum mechanics, and had even sent me a document which he described as his "favourite interpretation of quantum physics". In order to write )with a little difficulty) something meaningful here, the only quote you find in this post will be from that article :  http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9807075.pdf  

Okay, here we go. The discussion with Angela tonight majored on the state of the world as it currently stands, and the likelihood of our lifetime seeing one of two possibilities. Either, we will see Fermi's Paradox come to pass. Or, we will see a tip in the balance of the equation whereby humanity stands up and takes responsibility for itself, shakes itself into shape and says, "Yes, this is truly ridiculous. If we go on like this there is no option but self-destruction. We are therefore going to do things differently from now on. And that requires some major changes in thinking."

Now, we raised our (third) glass to the balance in which we hang, for there is no way of telling which will come to pass. But it is time for a timely quote from Dr Metzger's post:

(i) If it were that A, then it would be that B. 

This is a paradox, for it states neither as a superposition but gives equal validity to both states. Statements about states are valid to the argument, for some of my conversation with Angela was given to discussing the evolution of language. My interpretation of this is that as we are clearly products of the universe, we are given language by the universe in order to understand meanings, and some of those meanings are only made clear from what is commonly known as 'word association', as Angela pointed out. So if we make a statement about a state, whether its a state of mind or the state of Alaska, chances are that we are on a valid track simply because we have aligned our language in a way that is likely to make sense.

Many examples of this language association exist. Love and evolve, for instance, have a connection which is largely overlooked for the spelling in the latter form is backwards. Present and present, however, have no such problem. The present is a present. If you open it and think, "shit, that's not good," then that's your problem. The present is all you get.

Quantum-realism versus the conformity of human thinking is a big, big hurdle to overcome. If we manage it, and jump the bar, we could yet resurrect Utopia and find ourselves back in a world worth living in. If we don't, then within our lifetime we will see the demise of life on our planet and there will be no turning back. I am not a fan of swearing in the public domain, but Domani, it is Sunday already. If we as a species fail to wake up, we are fxcked. Goodnight xx 

---