Boltzmann Brains
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-11-2014, 07:13 AM
Boltzmann Brains
Prompted by Bucky in this post:
(18-11-2014 10:19 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(18-11-2014 10:02 PM)Free Wrote:  [snip]
"Come from" is meaningless unless space-time is in place, already.
It's like asking what's South of the South Pole.
See : (1:00, among others)



I've done some reading on Boltzmann Brains and I want to check some things that I don't understand. (Math isn't welcome, per se, but if it's the best way to explain I'll muddle along.)

1) Am I right in thinking that they're not actually talking about a literal, spontaneously forming brain with the ability to obverse the nothing it's not floating in? Instead it's a way of reducing a larger, more complex system down to the thing that is most important, that it is stable enough to produce an intelligence that is capable of observing the universe around it?

2) If A Boltzmann Brain is produced then why would it function for a non-finite/arbitrarily large amount of time? I understand that that this assumption scientifically-necessary-thing-that-I-don't-understand is why a model that produces more BB than not isn't tenable; we have no reason to assume that we aren't in the most likely subset of possibilities and that means that the ammount of BB's can only grow. But why would that work?

3) Why would a BB be more likely at all? ("Because" or a variation on it is a satisfying answer to this question.)

4) How exactly are we not BB? If the diagnostic trait behind a BB is that it's surrounded by nothing/ chaos/ something I don't understand (because I have such a good handle on chaos and nothing), how is that different than the non-space that does not surround the universe?

I may have malformed the questions. It's been a long day. I'll try to clarify on request.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2014, 07:29 AM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
There is not a shred of evidence for Boltzmann Brains, or that that they would or could form.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
19-11-2014, 08:06 AM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
(19-11-2014 07:13 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Math isn't welcome...

[Image: sad_puppy_762581.jpg]

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
19-11-2014, 05:15 PM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
(19-11-2014 07:29 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is not a shred of evidence for Boltzmann Brains, or that that they would or could form.

Well yes. It's a hypothetical raised by some cosmological models. It'd be exactly as valid if I was asking about a potential multiverse or the eternal-universe-collapses-into-itself-and-eventually-makes-a-new-universe stuff.

Would you take issue with the lack of evidence if I asked about either of them (Saying yes, you do dismiss them on lack of evidence is OK.) or am I going all false equivalency on you?

(19-11-2014 08:06 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(19-11-2014 07:13 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Math isn't welcome...

[Image: sad_puppy_762581.jpg]

I've seen that picture a couple of times and this is the first time I've noticed the adorable puppy wang. Not sure how to feel about that.

Full sentence:
(19-11-2014 07:13 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  (Math isn't welcome, per se, but if it's the best way to explain I'll muddle along.)
So to put it another way; I'd rather avoid math here but if it's necessary I'll suck it up and deal.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2014, 10:03 PM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
I've read more about it and in the interests of closing the thread (and demonstrate how fucking clever I am), I'm answering my own questions.

Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:1) Am I right in thinking that they're not actually talking about a literal, spontaneously forming brain with the ability to obverse the nothing it's not floating in? Instead it's a way of reducing a larger, more complex system down to the thing that is most important, that it is stable enough to produce an intelligence that is capable of observing the universe around it?

The assumption is that the lowest posible (most likely) entropy spike will only cause the matter required for the BBrain. The larger system required to sustain it is modeled as being much less likely.

Quote:2) If A Boltzmann Brain is produced then why would it function for a non-finite/arbitrarily large amount of time?

It doesn't. That was a strawman used by WLC in the video. (A strawman that was used for one point and then dropped.)

Quote: I understand that that this assumption scientifically-necessary-thing-that-I-don't-understand is why a model that produces more BB than not isn't tenable; we have no reason to assume that we aren't in the most likely subset of possibilities and that means that the ammount of BB's can only grow. But why would that work?

Again: It doesn't.

Quote:3) Why would a BB be more likely at all? ("Because" or a variation on it is a satisfying answer to this question.)

An entropy spike that produces the brain is so much smaller (more likely) than the spike required to create a larger system that even the odds of a combibation brain and sensory apparatus being formed spontaniously are greater than the larger system.

Since BBrains were proposed we have re-run the numbers and the odds for an entropy spike in the quantum universe resulting in a universe of matter of our size are 1:0. That is why any model that produces BBrains as a likely consequence of the function of the quantum universe is untenable. That and it's anthroprocentric-ness.

(Sorry Bucky. You were right.)

Quote:4) How exactly are we not BB? If the diagnostic trait behind a BB is that it's surrounded by nothing/ chaos/ something I don't understand (because I have such a good handle on chaos and nothing), how is that different than the non-space that does not surround the universe?

Because we interact with a larger system of matter.

Thanks everybody and sorry.[/thread]

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2014, 10:28 PM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
(19-11-2014 05:15 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Well yes. It's a hypothetical raised by some cosmological models. It'd be exactly as valid if I was asking about a potential multiverse or the eternal-universe-collapses-into-itself-and-eventually-makes-a-new-universe stuff.

"exactly as valid" ... I don't see that.
We know how the brains work that we know about. There are many requirements needed for them to work the way we know, and we only see them emerge from a molecular/cellular level of organization. I see no reason to accept that they could form spontaneously with no sensory input or storage system. We know how a multiverse might exist based on what we know about this one.

When Ludwig Boltzman proposed his "brain" probability, Neuro-science was in its infancy. It's a form of "intelligent design" (backwards) in a way. He never computed the probability that I know of. It's a nice fiction. There's no reason to buy it, or the premises it's built on.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 01:53 AM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
^That... Should have occured to me immediately. Cheers.

Now I said [/thread] young man and I expect you to respect that.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 02:04 AM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
(24-11-2014 10:03 PM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  The assumption is that the lowest posible (most likely) entropy spike will only cause the matter required for the BBrain. The larger system required to sustain it is modeled as being much less likely.
The lowest entropy spike would be not much different to de-sitter space, assuming de-sitter space is the point of highest entropy.

The question is:
If I "as a human mind" and given that low entropy is less likely than high entropy then what is more likely,
that a universe has formed with very low entropy and over 14 billion years has increased in entropy to such a point that I now exist via evolution, have lived a life and formed memories
OR
A brain has formed (with much more entropy than a baby universe) with memories in place and sufficient time to exist in order to think that its memories describe a plausible life lived, just sufficient enough for me to think this scenario right now before my brain is snuffed out of existence.

But the brain in order to function just enough, needs the right temperature not absolute zero or above 100 degrees, it needs oxygen, it needs blood...

I think evolution seems to be a more plausible explanation, but then again how do we calculate the odds?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 03:10 AM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
(25-11-2014 01:53 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  ^That... Should have occured to me immediately. Cheers.

Now I said [/thread] young man and I expect you to respect that.

Well alrighty then. Weeping
I never paid any attention to BBs. Well, I paid attention to Bucky Balls, not Boltzman Brains ... now that I know what they they are, I can't believe all the fuss over nuthin (WTF). Tongue

Our Holy Prophet's (hoc's) little doggy IS mighty cute.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 03:53 AM
RE: Boltzmann Brains
Just for the record, that ain't my dog. My dog's only little if you're a gorilla.

[Image: dog1_zps3903e8ef.jpg]

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: