Should we embrace capitalism or choose socialism? I think Weinstein, Greene, and many others, may be on a fools errand. On this episode of Conversations with Tom, Eric Weinstein delves into exactly what’s wrong with our education and economic system. So does this somehow solve the abortion issue? Eric Weinstein is a conspiracy theorist Eric Weinstein is a long time fan of Zero Hedge, an anonymously written conspiracy theory blog that fancies itself a "financial markets website", where all articles are written by "Tyler Durden" and carry an editorial narrative with a level of pessimism far beyond the character in Fight Club.
The Portal, a newish podcast by Eric Weinstein, has become a favorite of mine. Especially where neither of these “solutions” captures the complexity of the situation? The activist mindset is always trying to remove nuanced selections that might better match our world’s needs from among the multiple choice answers until it finds a comical binary. If we had let the embryologists set the multiple choice question there would be at least 23 Carnegie stages for the embryo before you even get to fetal development. It seems so unfathomable to us and so we must ask that question: how could this have come to be? Other than our desire for physics to be elegantly simple, what objective reason is there to believe that it is? Why is the sub-atomic world so complex? Brian Greene is a physicist working on a theory called, “String Theory”. When you think about it: why is there 17 subatomic particles? In all of these cases, there’s an entire industry built around writing articles that involve replacing conversations that might progress towards answers and agreement with simple multiple choice political options that foreclose all hope.
There is certainly a sense that we are 'digging down' further and further the rules the universe has the more we discover. Yes or no? September 27, 2020 May 25, 2013 by Dave. He is also a working musician and a writer, having founded Dangerous Intersection in 2006. I mean, do you really want open or closed borders?
The novel phenomena seen in Conway's game of life can't occur if the game is built around just a single rule. It is a confusing time, because our minds are used to trying to find patterns and making sense by finding rules that determine what we see.
Hello, I invite you to subscribe to Dangerous Intersection by entering your email below. Premise 1: Emergent systems require, multiple, separate, distinct, and completely unrelated rules in order to exist. The first 10 minutes of Episode 35 is a good example of how Weinstein reconceptualizes a problem. If I am the first to propose this conjecture, then lets call it “Migala's conjecture”. He offers…, I'm laughing at myself because I wrote those words not thinking about the word o…, The "right state of mind," I have concluded, is seeking to accept, not to unders…, I'm working hard to think of an institution that hasn't been severely damaged ov…, No, it was a different episode of a different podcast: "People I Mostly Admire."…. Racism: systemic problem or convenient excuse? It seems that it is ordinary that emergent systems spring forth from multiple unrelated rules/procedures. It seems so unfathomable to us and so we must ask that question: how could this have come to be?
But you don’t have to accept these middlebrow binaries, dilemmas and trilemmas. So I will leave you with the following thought.
Eric Weinstein is a mathematician working on a theory called, “Geometric Unity”. Do you support the war on drugs? I learned this lesson early…, Bill, are you acquainted with the writings of Environmental activist Mike Shelle…, Here's what I'm gathering . Good, then. We don’t even think to ask, Who are these people who have left us at each other’s throats debating an inappropriate multiple choice question that can never be answered?
All it does is get us to see how ridiculously transparent we are in our politics that we would allow our society to be led by those activists who would shoehorn the central scientific miracle of human development into a nutty political binary of convenience. Somehow a non-sentient blastula becomes a baby by a process utterly opaque to science, which has yet has no mature theory of consciousness. I invite you to listen to an episode or two. But not so fast! info_outline . Eric Weinstein is someone who was told throughout his schooling that there was something wrong with him. Should men and women be treated equally? In other words, both are trying to discover the Theory of Everything!
Think about where you are most divided from your loved ones politically.
The first most obvious question might be who? Well, Eric Weinstein is a Harvard math Ph. And I think that the technique here of teaching oneself to spot superposition problems in stalemated political systems brings a great deal of relief to those of us who find the perspective of naive activism a fairly impoverished worldview. You will have the option to receive emails notifying you of new posts once per week or more often. Is it indeed odd either way? Premise 2: The universe is an emergent system. But at its core is still that question: Is there a single rule? Or at the very least we know enough to draw a reasonable conclusion. Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. We are at this time in an unenviable position of discovering many sub-atomic particles, bosons, hadrons and fermions, yet not finding the set of rules that link them. No. If the universe isn't an emergent system what is?
Do you really want to claim that there is no systemic effect oppression or that it governs every aspect of our lives? Eric Weinstein finally released a video of his 2013 Oxford talk on "geometric unity". Your Conjecture is a reasonable question to ask: Why should we favour simplicity being no further basic rules to discover that make up our current complex understanding? I think you’ll be hooked too. Then we end up right where we started. You can't describe how the slime mold solves a complex maze with just one rule or procedure. I realized that any physical theory, like Special Relativity, is going to emerge as a consequence of postulates and axioms....which I suppose can be considered to be unrelated rules or procedures.
Springing forth from just one is the extraordinary speculative case. But instead of going forward from what we both know and don’t know with high confidence about the system, we are instead permanently deranged by being stuck with “Schrodinger’s Embryo” by the activists who insist on working backwards from their political objectives. Is China a trading partner or a strategic rival? The universe transformed from a quark-gluon soup to a machine which manufactures things which ponders it as result of rules operating on matter/energy. Consider the following argument. Yet pro-choice and pro-life activists insist on telling us that the developing embryo is either a mere bundle of cells suddenly becoming a life only when born or a full-fledged baby the moment the sperm enters the egg. The upside is my conjecture won't be demolished if a theory of everything is found!
There probably is no theory of everything. Then ask yourself “When I listen to the debates at my dinner table, am I hearing a set of multiple choice answers that sound like they were developed by scholars interested in understanding or by activists who were pushing for an outcome?” If the latter, think about whether you couldn’t make more progress with those you love by recognizing that the truth is usually in some kind of a superposition of the last remaining answers pushed by the activists.
Is it alive or dead? Premise 1 is as far as I know just my own conjecture. Are Eric Weinstein and Brian Greene barking up the wrong tree? Has feminism gone too far, or not far enough?
“The Portal,” a newish podcast by Eric Weinstein, has become a favorite of mine. Of course not. Take, for example, abortion. We need to keep probing, keep testing this and questioning this. You are considering issues that are right at the core of scientific philosophy let alone physics. He begins by discussing the conundrum of Schrodinger’s cat.
I invite you to listen to an episode or two. Eric Weinstein is a mathematician working on a theory called, “Geometric Unity”.
I admit that so far I have only skimmed the transcript of the … Weinstein offers his own interpretation of this “super-position” problem: Asking whether the cat is “alive or dead” improperly attempts to lock us into an over-simplistic binary, a false dilemma. You can guess my answer here. There are many fans and skeptics out there, looking in vain for a genuinely informed assessment of the idea. So in conclusion, a set of different and unrelated theories is the best you can ever do. Eric has a knack for recasting commonly discussed social problems in head-wrenchingly new ways that suggest solutions. If you fuck with Eric Weinstein's brother, you'v…, Bill, I enjoyed Crichton's article and agree with many of his points. I think you'll be hooked too. But the problem here is that we have allowed the activists rather than the embryologists and developmental biologists to hand us the “life versus choice” observable with its two terrible multiple choice options. The system in utero is a changing and progressing superposition tilted heavily towards not being a baby at the beginning and tilted heavily towards being one at the end of the pregnancy. Schools of fish, Slime molds solving mazes, Conway's game of life, ant lines, the formation of solar systems from clouds of dust, etc. Let me tell you what I think about this. Both are hoping the theories they are working on become the master, all-encompassing, coherent, theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all physical aspects of the universe! Brian Greene is a physicist working on a theory called, “String Theory”. This is the 'beauty' that many physicists yearn for - simplicity is often found as the source of complexity and this has yielded us useful results so far. Erich lives in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri with his two daughters. Richard, I can't take credit. The question of “Is it a baby’s life or a woman’s choice?” is agreed upon by everyone before fertilization or following birth because the observable in question has the system as one of the two multiple choice answers in those two cases. You can't have an emergent system with just one underlying rule. Instead, try asking a new question: If my loved ones and I trashed the terms of debate foisted upon us by strangers, activists and the news media, could we together fashion a list of multiple choice answers that we might agree contain an answer we all could live with and that better describes the true state of the system?