Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with metaphysics

Purpose of the Contingent Universe

Henry C. Mabuse — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 06:50:49 -0800

Searching for an article, probably pre-2004, which involves a 'new' philosophical approach to the, ahem, 'meaning of life' .. Basically, I wanted to come back and re-read the article, follow it up, do a bit of reading and research on the thinking behind it, but never did, and now it's gone. Can't remember the name of the writer/philosopher/theorist. I think he is relatively young, although that could be wrong.

The idea was along the lines that the purpose of the contingent universe is for intelligent life to arise and for that life to attempt to understand the purpose of the contingent universe... that's a bit woo-woo but I think it was a deal more serious than that.

I do not believe it was the anthropic cosmological principal or such like. I have an idea that the same theorist proposed that it is impossible to measure the location of any object in motion - not just sub atomic particles - and this was some how part of his theory. It was some kind of 'ground breaking' new theory or philosophical treatise, which at the time, due probably to laziness, alcoholism and general stupidity, I glanced over, bookmarked, and promptly forgot about. Current interests revived the memory..

As you can see, I'm totally vague on the details, and my google fu has failed me. It was a metaphysical type argument, and I believe it was largely new, not based on older philosophical lines of thought, and it probably crossed into QM.

Or did I dream it?

Buddha Pest

Christ, what an asshole — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:48:36 -0800

As a general skeptic, how do you come to terms with a partner who believes in metaphysics? I'm a firm agnostic, staunch proponent of the scientific method, and subscriber to the notion of variability and probability. Just about every partner I've had holds beliefs in such things as predestiny, past lives, and astrology.

I try to keep an open mind, but when a recent girl took me back to her place, gave me a tarot card reading, showed off her crystals, and went on about Wiccan practices, my eyes rolled so far to the back of my head I nearly gave myself an aneurysm. Everything else about her is awesome, but I cannot come to terms with putting effort into someone who doesn't give critical analysis to her surroundings. (As an aside, I'm a very intuitive person, and after her tarot reading, I tore it to bits then turned the tables, providing an amazingly accurate cold reading about her on my own, breaking down my methodology to detailed analysis, body language, and pattern recognition, to which she simply smiled and mused that I'm a clairvoyant with untapped potential.)

The obvious answer is to move on to someone else who shares the same values [is it a value?], but maybe someone can provide me with ideas on how to better temper my tolerance for faith, even insofar as family or friends.

So for the other staunch skeptics out there, how do you deal with partners with a different take on the possible? And is it an issue of potential long-term consequence, such as when marriage or kids come into play?

Oh, boy, parallel universe #57339! That's where I'm a Viking.

Rhaomi — Sat, 24 May 2008 17:39:43 -0800

How would the many-worlds interpretation work on the human level, if at all? (I'm no quantum physicist, so please forgive me if the following is woefully simplistic, ridiculously naive, and/or hopelessly wrong)

The way I've heard it explained, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics holds that for every situation in which multiple outcomes are possible, each one of those outcomes does happen -- albeit in its own universe. That the universe we perceive is just part of an inconceivably large multiverse of infinitely branching possibilities, and that every interaction between every atom everywhere in the universe creates another one, or multiple ones, all the time.

I've also heard that because every possible outcome occurs, even the most bizarrely improbable event has happened in at least one universe. This makes sense if the ideas in the above paragraph are true.

For instance, it is incredibly unlikely that a fair coin could come up heads twenty times in a row -- the odds are about 1,048,576 to 1. But if each coin toss branches into a universe where it lands heads and a universe where it lands tails, then at the end of the line one of the million+ universes would see it land heads all twenty times. Of course, most of the rest of the million branches would see a mixed outcome, so from the point of view of a single universe the odds are still very unlikely. But the many-worlds theory says it does happen somewhere.

But when you think about it, it wouldn't be that simple. For starters, each coin toss would make more than two universes. A lot more. For example, a single coin toss could have two universes where the coin lands tails, but one universe sees it land one centimeter further to the right than the other. And there would be a small set of worlds where the coin landed perfectly on its side. And an even smaller minority where all the molecules of the coin spontaneously evaporated at the same time. A colossally improbable event, but possible.

And hey, if this holds true for molecules and small objects like coins, could you not also extend it to the rest of the world (which is just a collection of 10^huge molecules)? Must there be a universe out there where, say, every person who bought a Florida State lottery ticket happened to pick the same number, which was the winning one? Or where every building on Earth suffered simultaneous structural failure? Or where everyone spontaneously decided to break into Broadway-style song and dance? And a trillion variations on these and other scenarios, each slightly different from the other? And that the only reason we (most of our selves?) don't experience these things is because the infinity of "normal" universes where probable things happen outnumbers the infinity of universes where "impossible" things happen?

It feels absurd, like I'm talking about the Infinite Improbability Drive instead of a theory of physics, but I'm not seeing why it shouldn't be true. I've tried finding answers, but most of the literature out there (with the occasional exception) deals with quantum physics in a dry, academic context that limits the discussion to the atomic level. And of the material that imagines crazy outlier universes like the ones I described, I don't have a good way of telling if the physics involved is real or just taking artistic liberties for the sake of interesting fiction.

Must I mourn for the Earth somewhere out there that suffered Total Existence Failure? (And the one that suffered it five minutes later, and the other one that suffered it sixteen years later, and the one that suffered it partially, losing the western hemisphere, and the one that lost the eastern hemisphere, and the one that suddenly split into two planets, and the one where Australia turned into gelatin, and etc.)

Oh, and I know that we still aren't sure about which interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct, and that even if we knew the many-worlds theory were right, we'd have no way to observe other universes. I just want to know if the things I described are allowable in the context of the theory as it's understood today.

Why can't I move shit with my mind?

Nattie — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 06:18:51 -0800

On what grounds does one draw the line between quantum physics/mechanics and pseudoscientific claims about the powers of consciousness? I'm naturally skeptical of claims like the following that purport to be supported by quantum physics/mechanics:

- Telekinesis.
- Telepathy.
- Healing yourself with your mind, etc.

I don't know enough about quantum physics to understand where the reasoning goes south, though. When I read skeptical articles, they usually dismiss the claims by saying "they misunderstand the science," but they don't go into detail. That's what I'm looking for.

If it's helpful, these sort of things tend to take the idea that your consciousness acts on everything it observes and extrapolates from there.

Does it have something to do with the idea of a "conscious observer" not necessarily meaning "a human being with a conscious," depending on your interpretation of quantum mechanics? Is it conflating superposition with observer effect? Something else?

Are these claims actually possible in some "legitimate" interpretations but we're doubtful those interpretations are true? Or are all the claims based on misunderstanding?

I feel like I have a very vague grasp of these concepts, and whenever I try to pinpoint the flaw in reasoning my mind can't process it.

Book reccomendation based on Michael Chrichton's Travels

nitsuj — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 11:22:02 -0800

I've been reading Michael Chrichton's Travels, and really enjoying his scientific prospective on the metaphysics, mysticism, energy, "New Age" spiritualism, and whatnot -- particularly in stories like "Cactus Teachings." What are some other books/authors you can recommend that approach these topics in Chrichton's skeptical-but-still-interested way? Bonus points for narrative-driven, personal experience stories in the vein of Chrichton.

Where to find metaphysical information?

jitterbug perfume — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 17:12:59 -0800

What's the best online repository for metaphysical information?

Metaphysics or meta-fraud?

Expat — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 01:44:03 -0800

Mrs Expat has in recent years become interested in New Age, metaphysics etc. She is considering applying to the University Of Metaphysical Sciences to earn a Bachelor's or beyond degree in metaphysics or related subjects. Leaving aside the question of belief, does the Hive Mind have any experience with this particular institution? Are they on the level or a "diploma" mill? The reason Mrs. E is interested in this particular institution is the possibility for distance learning due to linguistic barriers in our current country.

Any fact-based information would be a great help. Also any alternate sources for learning more on these types of subject, especially things like Reiki, would be huge!

As ever, thanks.

Soul merging?

dudiggy — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 01:14:55 -0800

Metaphysical Filter: Can you help me to find information related to this metaphysical experience? Since this event, I've been searching for similar accounts to help me understand what I was witness to. My research has not been fruitful with regard to this particular experience, so I turn to you for respectful suggestions for where I may find leads.

In preface to the following, it's meaningful to note that I'm an experienced hospice nurse. Also, prior to this experience my brother and I were rigid agnostics:

My brother and I were gathered at our beloved fathers death-bed, as we had been for the preceeding few days. At that moment, there was no sign that death was imminent and my father was between consistantly regular breaths when my brother proclaimed, "Maggie, he's gone." Before I could protest, my father took another breath... his last. I remember screaming at my brother that it wasn't possible for him to have known that Dad was gone at that instant. My brother told me that he didn't have the words to explain it, but that he "felt" it. Later when pressed, he reluctantly described what he felt: "I felt the sensation of spinning energy in my chest . It funneled up to my head where it lingered. The energy then burst outward through the top of my head." When asked, he said that it wasn't painful, but in fact, was a sense of release from constraint.

My brother and I have since come to view this experience as our fathers last gift to us. However, I need to know if this experience is unique and, more importantly, how to incorporate it into my logic-based reality construct.

Where's the solipsism references?

wackybrit — Sun, 23 Jul 2006 19:17:06 -0800

From what I can tell, the concept of solipsism is grossly under-explored and under-exploited by the arts (books, movies, fine art, etc). Are there any good references to solipsism in modern books, movies, or other entertainment media? If not, why not?

The end of time

Rothko — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 22:44:32 -0800

How do we know the mathematical models of physics — equations modeling the universe — apply across the universe, to data we collect about the universe that may be billions of years old? (What would be the process for verifying this?) By extension, is there general, metaphysical consensus in the physics community if mathematics is solely an invention of the mind, or is it a piecemeal discovery, a revelation, about the universe?

Thirdly, given Hawking radiation which leaks outside of a black hole, is that information statistically random — and can said information be collected, and therefore useful for, say, a one-time pad? What is the rate of emission, for example, in relation to the size of said black hole?

Who hears voices in their heads? Why?

cortex — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 07:08:18 -0800

Voices in your head. What mental disorders are associated with this? What other phenomena? Which historical and mythical figures? I'm working on a novel, and one of my central characters is just coming to terms with the abnormality of a voice in her head. I'm looking for angles and ideas. She's going to talk to a shrink, probably have a sit down with a priest (family is Catholic), and I'm looking for other folks she might talk to and some of the things they might throw at her, along with the sorts of things she might trip across in her own research.

I want to cover everything. Psychiatry, religion, and every other phenomenology y'all can muster. Details are awesome, but jumping-off points and references are welcome and probably more than a panicked writer deserves.