Of Clocks and Clouds: Reality in the Digital Age

[Israe5l]

Of course, we can't go back wards in time. If we did go backwards thats not backwards anymore, its forwards.

[cheeseylemon]

The default Windows videos? Really? lol

[2bsirius]

@cheeseylemon

Windows movie maker had a great program just at the end of Vista. It has some great music. It had lots of options. THEN they discontinued the whole thing when Windows 7 came on line. Now the windows movie making software is a joke and doesn't even come preloaded. You can only get it through Windows Live...SO I now use a commercial software instead. Nothing good ever lasts.

[2bsirius]

@realskpetic

It works in experimentally .falsifiable ways... Theoretically predictable is useless if it isn't falsifiable. There are those who will tell you that Christianity is theoretically predictable

[Israe5l]

I used to think philosophy was about "primacy". What is the single true understanding? Perhaps that is chasing monism. Hopeing to write reality as One. But now I feel comfortable with dualism to some extent. A balanced dualism. The logical dualism and the empirical dualism.

[2bsirius]

@Israe5l

Another great comment....I working on just this idea right now. 

[Israe5l]

@2bsirius The story doesn't end there. After dichotomy we have trichotomy (because, take Two, half one of Two, one gets Three.) But I don't see Four or Five much. What we get next is Pluralism. Now this is a different beast. You have logical pluralism (which comes from the contemplation of One) and empirical pluralism which comes just from observation.

Perhaps one needs to live in dualism for a while till one progress to Triad. Most people will just go from One to many (empirical pluralism).

[Israe5l]

@Israe5l correction. logical pluralism comes from the contemplation of Two. (not One).

[Israe5l]

I was not clear on Kant. It for a long time been puzzled why Kant had only one example for synthetic apriori. Namely, "counting". My solution: there is only one synthetic apriori, which is "counting". But as we know from Cantor that, we only have countable numbers and uncountable numbers (uncountable infinity). So, I should truncate the uncountable: the irrational numbers. Now, the real line is a fiction. But then we never saw a real line in our life anyways. Nothing is lost.

[Israe5l]

I am thinking of adapting to a relativism that endoreses countable infinity and the two trancedental numbers. Meaning irrational numbers are not true existence. There is a battle between rational and irrational numbers. This conclusion I have reached thinking of Kant's example of synthetic apriori. And Kant could go no furthure because there is no furthure. We only have countable numbers. (Kronecker) It has major relavance. Zeno's paradox. But more drastically the thoughts about chaos.

[2bsirius]

@Israe5l

Interesting idea. It's 8:19 in the morning here and I'm just on my second cuppa. I'll come back and think more about this when I'm fully awake.

[twothlesswonder]

Great video!

The Universe is like a clock (it really depends on what scale you're investigating), it's us who are like clouds. (is that a deepity?!)

Although our perceptions are often misleading, the scientific method and/or critical thought are powerful tools for cutting through the clutter of the bias within our immediate senses.

Perhaps it is because we are like clouds that we even possess the ability to know about the universe in the first place. (there's that damn deepity again)

[2bsirius]

Great comment...I'm going to give it some thought...

[rjswolfman]

Because of quantum uncertainty, nothing physical is absolutely predictable, but if heisenberg uncertainty weren't a fact (forgeting that this would lead to a theoretically possible paradox), the universe would indeed be a clock. As for the reality of reality, i would consider 4+ dimensional figures to exist in the same way that the laws of logic exist, you could never physically find one, so they are true more than they are real.

[2bsirius]

This is what I think of as boundary conditions...Yes, I agree

[Israe5l]

A thought. I am thinking relativist/absolutist divide is not so important. Or at least, its possible to convert relativistic data to absolutistic data and other way around. Or this idea itself is not so important. (I guess, its not important when you are making a model. But conceptually, it is important.)

[Israe5l]

VI as a substitution for I? The root does not make sense. No?

[Israe5l]

Good music.

The clock world is the world driven by the absolutist's time. The clouds world are the world driven by the relativist's time.

[Israe5l]

"driven by the relativist's time" doesn't sound good at all.

Relativist's time is where time progression depends on which clock one checks the time with. Some clocks measure time faster than others.

[Ormaaj]

Yeah good music. I like the first chord of the phrase: a flat VI7 in 3rd inversion as a substitute for I. Interesting deceptive choice.

[Israe5l]

The probablem of the world is that it has two aspects. One is the physical world. The other is the language world. Physical world is bounded by physical laws described by mathematics. Language world is bounded only by our imagination.

[wltmy]

The question to determine what is "real" seems to be an unprofitable question, because one first has to establish what is not "real". Obviously no mind can encompass everything to make such a distinction. But Pablo Picasso said it better; ``everything you can imagine is real``.

[IridescentEye]

3. Ghosts on the other hand are very unlikely to be of a physical nature, as you and I have thought they must be originating from the 3 possibilities below. Thus there can not be a natural progression as seen with the discovery of bacteria.

However who knows what the future brings, just hope it's relatively free and bountiful .... got my doubts though.

[IridescentEye]

2. .... starting with bad air, using incense etc. to try to counteract it ......ring a ring of roses, a pocket full of posies springs to mind. Later Hooke (who I may add was an absolute genius and easily the equal of Newton) published Micrographia (an absolutely astounding piece of work that must have amazed all of those educated and lucky enough to appreciate it), giving an insight into the microscopic world. Thus you can see it was only a matter of time until the puzzle was solved. ......

[Israe5l]

There is certainty enough. If not exact certainty. This word "certainty" is used differently by different people. How a police man will use it or how a physicist will use it.

[IridescentEye]

That's a very good point, he who controls the language controls the world .... you only need to look at the law society for proof of that (or the BBC, but I won't go there). The only true language that is virtually infallible is mathematics, but even that has it's problems.

[Israe5l]

"he who controls the language controls the world". Wasn't my point. My point was because everyone has different use of language, it gives flexiablity and macule to the society.

[wltmy]

IridescentEye, If mathematics is virtually infallible, so be numerology. I really can't envisage the difference they both seem to suppose a relation between numbers. Math is numerology, or is numerology math? if not, where do numbers come from? Numbers come from angles, where do angles come from? angles are virtual concepts. If numbers can alter a formula, to have a different outcome in reality.

[IridescentEye]

1. I'll start by presupposing what you mean by numerology. My understanding is that it's an occult practice by which non-numerical characters are given values by numerals. This then leads to a calculation, which in turn leads to some kind of prediction or assertation. In order for this to have come about numbers must have been created first. Therefore it is difficult to state that they are the same thing. I am lead to believe that numerals and early maths were developed for commerce.

[IridescentEye]

2. It's true, both numerology and maths both have a relationship with numbers, however only maths has a relationship with physical reality and has been verified to hold this relationship with a very high degree of accuracy. Numerology, on the other hand, has only a relationship with a totally unverifiable mystical "reality".

I don't believe numbers come from angles. An angle must be attributed a value, otherwise it's meaningless. Thus numbers must have predated angles.

[Ormaaj]

Very good points IridescentEye. One thing I would have worded a bit differently is where you say that "maths has a relationship with physical reality". I tend to think of numbers as coming out of the discrete world of set theory, peano arithmetic, logic etc. Philosophically speaking, math falls entirely in the domain of a priori knowledge. That it is only abstract and not tied to reality is what makes it reliable. Your 3rd point makes it clear that you do understand this.

[IridescentEye]

3. A formula is a model of the physical world. e.g C=π2r

True, if you change the numbers you change the output of the model, but you don't change reality. If the circle you're looking at in the physical world has a radius of 3, then C=18.85 approx. Putting the value of 5 into the variable r doesn't make the physical circle grow. So I don't really get your meaning on that point sorry.

[worldlystone]

Reality is a Clock and a Cloud.

[synsei1]

a cloud made of clocks made of clouds

[NLPNVC]

Hmm cool question. My guess, obviously a guess, is that the universe is more like a compass. There are certain principles which are timeless and unchanging. Nut hey, what do I know. Love images, thanks for sharing. Cheers.

[Mastikator]

Heh, I was expecting this to be about Microsoft's vision about their digital cloud. :P

Nice.

[ballyboneman]

Depends on perspective; depends on what level of 'magnification' you are using. At low 'magnification' it behaves very much like a clock; very particular; very regular; very predictable. However at high 'magnification' it seems all fuzzy and unpredictable; very cloud-like. Maybe at some point we will discover that, like the cloud, the apparent fuzziness and unpredicatbility is an illusion brought about by highly complex interacting 'clocks'.

[IridescentEye]

This may seem a bizarre parallel, but I believe humans react in a similar manner. A crowd can seem quite predictable, but an individual less so.

[StevenErnest]

This is wonderful!

Reminds me of Alan Watts' "Prickles" and "Goo" -- as two types of people -- and worldviews.

I'd say the universe is a cloud, but we use clocks to understand it. It all depends on the context. Perhaps we need a new science or philosophy -- "CloudClocks." (Makes me think of a Salvador Dali painting. ;)

[cardellacole2]

does physical reality include mind, mind as a physical , mind being a projection from sub atomic energy traveling into a photon as a movement in time [ from here ] as sub atomic action of sub conscious energy , [ to there ] the point of reflection the atomic surface in a conscious awareness as the now

[cardellacole2]

for me the sub conscious is stored in the sub atomic energies electrons, neutrons, protons that as a whole we all share , we colour that dream thought energy by the illusions that we,,,,, as selves,,,,,become , the electron is a kind of dream energy that like a moth to light becomes held within the polaric force of the proton which becomes the centre of a thought attention a nucleus around which the dream energies coalesce into the concious atomic world

[cardellacole2]

you are the visual projection of polarized sub atomic energies as the visual field held in time as photon to the object of form , this is the visual experience as mind , , you are that mind , , you are that light

[cardellacole2]

free will, as mind , in the image of god.

[IChoseTheRedPill]

awesome... cool song!

[achampag]

interesting

[xy11xy]

Good question, bsirius: in what sense is 4 dimensions real..

Clearly, it is possible for things to exist that we can't see...at least until we build the mechanism/measurement device to detect it.

So...do ghosts exist?...maybe we just can't detect them yet..except through the consciousness of people who claim to see them.

Maybe ghosts can be mathematically detected?

[2bsirius]

No, ghosts don't exist...

What was the exact point of this comment, xy11xy? Just curious

[IridescentEye]

I don't believe you can say "ghosts don't exist", however you can say that there is no validated proof that ghosts do exist ...... anyway I believe that mathematics is in itself a form of perception. Therefore we can perceive 4 dimensional objects. If we couldn't perceive them we wouldn't be aware of them.

Perception: "the act or faculty of apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind; cognition; understanding."

[2bsirius]

Thanks for adding this comment, IrdescentEye...Actually, I posted a comment similar to yours in which I pointed out the problems with proving a negative [i.e., "ghosts don't exist"]...but I deleted it because there was a typo in the text, and I could never then get it to repost. So thanks for adding the qualification you've added here.

About your 4 dimensional comment, yes we can perceive them, but only mathematically and through the shadows they would cast into our 3-dimensional world...

[xy11xy]

I thought it was clear...sorry.

Are you implying something other than the clarity of my comment?

There was a time that people would have said "bacteria don't exist" similarly to how you've said "ghosts don't exist". Then came microscopes...and the rest is history.

The first evidence of bacteria was illness... Maybe one day we will say the first evidence of ghosts was that shadowy apparition down the hall...or that creepy feeling.

I don't think I'm saying anything bizarre here..

[IridescentEye]

I don't believe you are saying anything bizarre. However to answer your question, one must first understand what a "ghost" is. Assuming that anything like that exists. Are ghosts some super-natural phenomena projected from some sort of "after life", are they merely natural recordings of some manner, or do they manifest themselves purely in the mind of the beholder? Whatever the answer is, it's pretty off topic lol.

[xy11xy]

Yeah..agree it's off topic.  But the example of ghosts was only to juxtapose with the idea of 4 dimensions existing mathematically, but not existing via perception.

I like how you've stated the questions of what a ghost might be...it's exactly what I was thinking.

But, I don't think we'd HAVE to know what a ghost is FIRST. I don't think people had any clue/concept of what a bacteria might be...

[IridescentEye]

1. Ooops sorry 2bsirius for going wildly off topic, but i guess thats an occupational hazard of youtube authorship.

You've made a fair comment xy11xy, an investigator shouldn't investigate with a presupposed idea of what they might be seeking, however your ghost / bacteria parallel doesn't really stand up (although it's quite amusing, especially if one considers the possibility of a ghost bacterium).

The historic concept of bacteria has followed quite a clear progression .....

[xy11xy]

I want to ask you to outline what that perceptual progression of bacteria was... and see whether it is similar to the current perception of ghosts...

But that would be off topic.

[IridescentEye]

Can one perceive ghosts? Are they actually apprehendable, or are they still in the realm of imagination with the possible ends of apprehension?

This is moving into the realm of semantics .... we need to clarify what words mean to carry the discussion further .... and that could get dull.

[MrPainfullytrue]

Dali did the first painting of a 4th demisional cross that I had saw....

it's amazing to think,there might be more demisions, it's very cool.

..and likely.

[StevenErnest]

Before I'd read you comment, her video made me think of Dali, too. An image of a "CloudClock," in his style; that's not a painting of his, but he did the melting clocks. The Surrealists, like Picasso, metaphorically portrayed a 4th dimension. And there are the Hindu gods with the two or three faces, perhaps observing the past, present, and future simultaneously.

[manwaring]

Is it wrong I want to start a religion dedicated to the Duckrabbit?

[RowanFortuneWood]

Popper inspired videos are great, thanks for uploading 5*

[pknvdw]

Could it be a cloud of clocks, or a clock made of clouds?