Comment by mormon1 on Why Many-Worlds Is Not The Rationally Favored Interpretation · 2009-10-01T17:10:22.476Z · LW · GW

"What happens when I measure an entangled particle at A after choosing an orientation, you measure it at B, and we're a light-year apart, moving at different speeds, and each measuring "first" in our frame of reference?

Why do these so-called "probabilities" resolve into probabilities when I measure something, but not when they're just being microscopic? When exactly do they resolve? How do you know?

Why is the wavefunction real enough to run a quantum computer but not real enough to contain intelligences?

These are all questions that must be faced by any attempted single-world theory. Without specific evidence pointing to a single world, they are not only lethal for the single-world theory but lethal for anyone claiming that we have good reason to think about it."

No, No, No and No....

Until we have both a unifying theory of physics and conclusive proof of wave function collapse one way or the other the single world vs multi-word debate will still be relevant.

"Why is the wavefunction real enough to run a quantum computer but not real enough to contain intelligences?"

Not the right question, being charitable here, I will assume you're asking about the objective reality of the wave-function. But this has nothing to do with intelligence or anything of the sort.

This is really nauseating watching a bunch of non-physicists being convinced by their own non-technical arguments on a topic where the technical detail is the only detail that counts.

The best thing you guys can do for yourselves is learn some physics or stop talking about it. I am trying to help you guys save face.

Just in case anyone is interested in responding don't bother I don't have enough respect for anyone here to care what you have to say.

Comment by mormon1 on The Unfinished Mystery of the Shangri-La Diet · 2009-04-11T15:58:16.726Z · LW · GW

Wow, so let me guess you tried exercising for a couple months and did not see much and then gave up... Well try following your own advice and instead of assuming the art failed you, assume you failed the art.

Mind you, aerobic exercise does put me in better aerobic condition, sorta. It just doesn't have anything to do with weight loss.

Bullshit aerobics with proper dieting will make you lose weight or do you think you're somehow special? I would bet you either were not doing it right or gave up to quickly. You seem like a very sedintary person so it will take you a while to lose the weight. My personal guess is that working out is just not that important to you so grow up and admit it.

I have plenty of friends who do not have good metabolism but they have all suceeded in losing weight and keeping it off. Its only impossible if you do it wrong or you expect magic results...

Comment by mormon1 on Rationality is Systematized Winning · 2009-04-05T16:31:44.268Z · LW · GW

I make this point because a lot of success in life consists in holding yourself to high standards; and a lot of that is hunting down the excuses and killing them.

Not that you'd know anything about this, since you papers read like my 8th grade papers.... Oh wait you never actually went to school beyond that...

Comment by mormon1 on [deleted post] 2009-03-22T17:33:42.252Z

Would you like to know all the bugs I've exploited?

I do appreciate this effort it was like shooting fish in a barrel.