Goodest logic

There is like, a really weird logical argument about choice and free will (tangentially related to manifestation).

So let's say A and B are discussing about metaphysics.

A: It's all just a matter of choosing, B. You can be anything you want, do anything you want! The world is simply a collection of possibilities, waiting to be plucked.

B: So why do I feel that I have so few options?

A: If you choose one thing, you lose the option to chose an inconsistent option.

B: But I didn't choose to be poor, lonely and miserable! Why can't I just "decide" to be a millionaire now?

A: In theory you can.

B: (thinks really hard)

B: .... no it doesn't work!!! I'm still poor, lonely and miserable!

A: The issue is that you have beliefs about what is possible and impossible about this world. You don't believe that a poor person can just magically think themselves into being rich and suddenly get a million dollars.

B: That's not true! Why are you so sure I don't believe in such magical thinking?

A: If you believed in this magical thinking, you'd already be a millionaire now.

B: Are you gaslighting me saying that I "lack faith"? Don't give me that bullshit!

A: OK, so you honestly believe you can become a millionaire by just thinking?

B: Let's assume that, yes. Then why doesn't it work?

A: Because you actually don't want to be a millionaire.

B: You're gaslighting me again!!

A: I'm just saying either you believe you have can change your circumstances but you don't decide to change, or you believe you don't have that ability. Either way, you made a choice in your belief system that is inconsistent with being a millionaire.

B: #%!%!@%!^!

The Hard problem of Identity

It is a corollary of "the 'self' is hard to define" that identity is extremely difficult to prove conclusively.

It is difficult enough for mortal humans. People have given up for spirits.

天天素食

荃灣南豐中心嘅天天素食啲荷葉飯幾好味。一路拎返屋企一路聞到香氣。

係衰在啲飯太過黐住啲葉⋯

Can logic be retroactively filled-in?

In a subjective simulation, the moon does not exist if you look away from it.

We know that in a simulation, the creators of the simulation can just make a moon.

Similarly, they can create something behind a door just as the door is being opened. In the subjective perspective, talking about "what really existed behind the door before it was open and observed" is quite meaningless.

But can creators of the simulation create logical arguments out of thin air?

Suppose humans in a simulation encounter the idea of the right angle triangle for the first time. Is it inevitable that they would come to the conclusion that a^2 + b^2 = c^2 ? Does this fact really exist outside of subjective experience?

We may fail to imagine how it could work at all. But many people fail to imagine how a moon could be garbage collected when not in use.

So are there parallel universes, if only in our minds, where logic works differently?

This is a question of the utmost importance, because it affects how we should look at results of computation. In "this timeline", all results of deterministic computation should converge. This is not in dispute. But if results of computation do not necessarily converge across "parallel universes" so to speak, then results of computation are no less malleable (to creators of simulation) than the thing behind the door.

X後感

《三體》

睇咗 youtube 上啲《三體》濃縮講解。原來都好撚長，要聽兩三個鐘 (加速前)。

個故仔一開始係有少少弱智，咩「物理唔存在」就要自殺，笑到我⋯ 

但後面似乎有返少少睇頭。 個「智子」概念幾有趣，無論係作為物理構想或者係plot device都係幾唔錯。

聽聞「黑暗森林法則」係三體普及化嘅，都算係對人類喺宇宙探索過程嘅一種有趣嘅貢獻

《金庸新修版》

大略睇咗《神鵰》嘅新版。感覺係用力過度，太過著跡。可能有人覺得係劃蛇添足，但我反而覺得純粹係修輯手法有少少劣。如果輕輕手修執下啲細微位，未必真係咁差。又例如《天龍八部》嘅結局，其實段譽王語嫣兩人嘅關係根本九唔搭八，稍有人生閱歷嘅人就會明白件事最後一定係「因了解而分開」，所以新修版嘅結局係極其合理嘅。但又係手法有啲劣，搞到大家唔接受。

呢樣嘢都令人感嘆，就算係同一個人，隔咗幾十年啲功力真係會荒廢嘅，所以就算本意係好，執出嚟嘅結果竟然係咁差。

《Re: Zero》 第三季

屌，播到一半停幾個月吊癮。今次感覺太多獨白。冇咗頭兩季嗰種懸疑感。

先知力

我忽然留意到一個好得意嘅問題

絕大部份有通靈能力嘅人嘅運作係以濟助世人嘅模式運作。以身體作為媒體，以問答模式開放俾世人使用。由於世人所求千奇百怪，所以呢種靈力係好廣泛同隨興嘅，唔係話鑽研某樣嘢就可以加深嘅能力嚟。

由於我對世界所有嘢都有種距離感，所以我係好難行呢種模式。

我平時使用嘅「先知力」，通常係需要自己長時間浸淫喺某個範疇，少則一年半載多則十年八載，係要以理性分析大腦思維為框架，熟悉咗件事情，然後再做判斷就通常冇錯。若果夾硬講其實無所謂靈力，可以話係純粹用大腦理性思維模式就可以解釋到件事，但事實上我啲結論通常都同大眾所得嘅結論迥異，所以我都唔知算係點。 但有時啲嘢的確係無得用理性解釋嘅，例如細蚊仔嗰陣估到人哋麻芝菇出乜 (其他猜拳遊戲完全估唔到)，中學時可以OK準咁估到比賽結果，大個揀 tech stack 全部都最後跑出咁滯 (i.e. 唔會上錯車做夕陽工業)

所以照計真係需要少少先知力嘅。

但喺熟悉嘅範疇以外，我係完全唔得掂嘅。每一範都要三五七年先摸熟，在此之前係連初學者都不如，但通咗嗰下就會忽然去到可以自成一家嘅水平。中間嗰下跳躍我係成日都唔明搞乜鬼嘅。

近排學啲靈性嘢、玄學嘢之類開始遇到少少 plateau，啲嘢聽嚟聽去都係差唔多，好多甚至離唔開我十年八年前寫嘅文嘅範圍。(當年寫嗰幾篇文真係靠先知力。不過都係要我諗咗呢啲問題十幾年摸透咗宇宙真理⋯)

如果我對世人有多啲「愛」我可能可以試下做下「媒」，「媒」個特性係會感受到個人嘅能量唔同咗。但而家個感覺係啲「先知力」係純粹靠「自己」。

可能通靈都有千百種唔同方法，純粹好奇下其他人係點。

Metaphor

 

This is like... what they tried to tell *us*.