|
|
|
|
|
|
by jarpadat
1346 days ago
|
|
|
Consider an alien which subsists on photons, which is a form of life that exists today. We know from heseinberg that the sensing of this food "here" or "there" is nonphysical. Presumably our creature's civilization would require no heisenberg to discover what anyone can see from their own photosensor. Rather it is the concept of objects remaining in a single place that would require some real mathematical innovation to a creature with no experience of such an idea. And so this distinction of entirely separate logical states, far from being basic or inescapable, is our very human invention. It is useful for creatures like us, who perceive things in one place when they are not really so, who do their computing with sand in a region where it's bountiful, and who encode abstractions as software because doing so in dedicated hardware is more costly. While it is certainly possible that all intelligent life would have these constraints, there is no particular reason to expect it. What we can expect is that humans will expect others to be too much like ourselves; it's a well-known cognitive defect in our species. |
|
|
Plants don't just subsist on photons, there are many other ingredients.
> We know from heseinberg that the sensing of this food "here" or "there" is nonphysical.
I don't know what this means. How do you "non-physically" sense photons?
> Rather it is the concept of objects remaining in a single place that would require some real mathematical innovation to a creature with no experience of such an idea. And so this distinction of entirely separate logical states, far from being basic or inescapable, is our very human invention.
Assuming you're talking about some alien made of bosons that aren't subject to the Pauli exclusion principle, you'll note that bosons still interact with fermions in which that principle does apply, so I don't think your argument follows. I admit I don't really understand your premises though so I have no idea what you really meant.