Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 523127
  • *Total Topics: 15575
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 7
  • *Total: 8

Author Topic: Cases for Tesla being insane?  (Read 11301 times)

Offline buzneg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 249
Cases for Tesla being insane?
« on: January 26, 2007, 12:24:28 AM »
This thread is to find out if there was any GOOD cases that show that he was really insane.

-his wacky idea's -debunked not so whacky, just not understood

-his using of a different napkin for each time he whipes his hands -uhh I do this too, when napkins are free why not grab a bunch and use a new one each time, otherwise your hands don't get totally clean. Not using more napkins because your afraid of wasting half a penny is more insane.

-and his seeing things are arn't real when he was a kid because of his imagination -he learned to control that when he got older, so not insane.


anymore?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Cases for Tesla being insane?
« on: January 26, 2007, 12:24:28 AM »

Offline Loki67671

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2007, 10:15:23 PM »
Anyone studying electrical engineering to the level of Tesla must be able to "see" beyond that which is in front of you. In fact the unseen became manifest in the geometry of his devices. Imagine presenting such concepts to people at the dawn of public familiarity with electrical energy purposely delivered down wires. Of course he was labled insane, among other labels, probably even by the medical profession of the time. I have read his lectures and writings and I can't detect any hint of insanity. A man so far ahead of his peers is doomed to be called a freak. One must accept it I suppose.

Loki

Offline Thaelin

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 997
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2007, 01:27:11 AM »
   This just plain saddens me. I am very sorry to have to put it like this but it boils down to needing something or some one to dump on. Naturally he is not here to defend him self against the hits. The man was genius plain and simple. When you can match or best him then you have reason to talk. He gave so much to this world and see what he got in return. My appologies but it just pisses me to hear it

sugra

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2007, 01:27:11 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2007, 02:37:55 AM »
1) Used to "relax" near a million volt coil...
2) He accepted funding from these two scumbags...
Morgan
(http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/niagara_power/niagara_poer_tesla12.jpg)
Westinghouse
(http://rs6.loc.gov/papr/west/westgorg.jpg)

These two dirty bastards are the reason things are the way they are today.
Those two examples are definitely crazy things I wouldn't have done...

Offline buzneg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 249
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2007, 12:15:17 AM »
   This just plain saddens me. I am very sorry to have to put it like this but it boils down to needing something or some one to dump on. Naturally he is not here to defend him self against the hits. The man was genius plain and simple. When you can match or best him then you have reason to talk. He gave so much to this world and see what he got in return. My appologies but it just pisses me to hear it

sugra


This thread is in support of tesla. I listed reasons why tesla was thought to be insane and explained why they're bullshit.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2007, 12:15:17 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Moab

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2007, 02:20:58 AM »
Dr.Tesla was not insane.

flying to the moon in a tin can
super sonic flight with 100 passengers
wheeled vehicles that achieve 750+ MPH
a cure for polio
a vaccine for smallpox
So many more it is ridicules
                                      thats ALL crazy talk!!
Tesla was a gift to mankind. And the energy cartel of the time, and the greed they had for power over the masses screwed it all up. With luck and much hard work and free energy/OU forums like this one we can all share our ideas in. perhaps  that can be rectified soon. Imagine what Dr.Tesla would think of our internet,and the world of today, I think he would be astonished to find out just how much his work payed off.
 you were all thinking that weren't you                                                                     @ Dingus. Westinghouse owed his ass to Tesla and Tesla forgave his debt! Had he not done so we would have appliances from the TESLA company instead of Westinghouse. Instead He Dr.Tesla died penniless,  Nice payback huh?        MOAB

Offline Mannix

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 563
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2007, 04:28:23 AM »
Insanity.

What does it mean?

What does it mean to you?

Try for a definition and you will soon discover that nobody uses the term for lack of definition.

Was he different in his thinking?....i recon so

Was he actually thinking for himself ....yes

Did it matter that others did not think in his way....no

Were they offended by this?.....yes..

Did they need a name for him so that they could drag others down into their pit of ignorance?...absolutely!!

Has this changed?..... Now there is the question!



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2007, 04:28:23 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #7 on: February 02, 2007, 08:40:19 AM »
Insanity:
1 : a deranged state of the mind usually occurring as a specific disorder (as schizophrenia)
2 : such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility
3 a : extreme folly or unreasonableness b : something utterly foolish or unreasonable

May help people further understand the question and my two examples.

~Dingus

Offline Mannix

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 563
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2007, 09:24:14 AM »

Insanity:
1 : a deranged state of the mind usually occurring as a specific disorder (as schizophrenia)
So we need the specific disorder...


2 : such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility

As a legal term . Check it out ..it isnt used as a legal term...not any more ...they must use a specific diagnosed disorder..nowadays any way... but in the days of burning witches..it did not matter

3 a : extreme folly or unreasonableness b : something utterly foolish or unreasonable

unreasonable......sounds like doing something deemed impossible by some ..would be unreasonable to them.

I guess he was insane by that definition in that time...

now if he were alive today...of course we would heed his directives wouldnt we?

sorry to drag this out Dingus..I really think that it is a great question.

My answer is...........( not that it matters).Tesla was not insane..But then again I never knew the man..perhaps he kept putting the garbage out instead of the milk bottles. Its possible that the he actually could visualise the electrons....or were they faries?

A great man who's knowledge was hijacked  by the agendas of those who did not understand as he did.
Its sounding familiar again..better go  my shrinks are waiting for the help that I can offer them in discovering several new and undocumented disorders.

Lindsay



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2007, 09:24:14 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2007, 12:10:44 PM »
All of Einstein's doors were painted red, and he couldn't tie his own shoes...

Go figure!

All of my examples of are the third catagory, but to be reasonable, we're all a little insane.

~Dingus

Offline CTG Labs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2007, 12:25:00 PM »
There is a fine line between genius and insanity.  To be that clever your mind has to be like that!  Maybe he was insane, but look what he gave us that we still use today, he changed the world!

Most of the great minds have been a bit messed up, being loners or having complusive disorders, you cant be normal and be a genius!  But then what is normal, I'm not!

D.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2007, 12:25:00 PM »
3D Solar Panels

kokomoj0

  • Guest
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2007, 06:12:13 PM »
1) Used to "relax" near a million volt coil...
2) He accepted funding from these two scumbags...
Morgan
(http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/niagara_power/niagara_poer_tesla12.jpg)
Westinghouse
(http://rs6.loc.gov/papr/west/westgorg.jpg)

These two dirty bastards are the reason things are the way they are today.
Those two examples are definitely crazy things I wouldn't have done...


Mostly "bastard" number 1!  That is as far as the continual decline of the republic. but how could have he known......






Offline d3adp00l

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2007, 07:14:18 PM »
Insane people say things and do things that normal people can't, or rather choose not to understand. When you have an understanding of a subject far beyond anyone around you (and you are a bit arrogant) it is sometimes (usually) a waste of time to explain things in an inacurate way so that people can grasp what you are saying. Tesla was brilliant and without his ol JP morgan wouldn't have the coil to spark a gasoline engine, we wouldn't have 90% of the tech we do today without Master Tesla. However Tesla was a bit arrogant and very efficient in everything he did (though his efficiency was not always understood) and for his to waste his valuable time making the low brow morons around him understand what he knew would be a grand waste of time.
     So what came out of Master Tesla's mouth was not understood by those around him and to them sounded like the ramblings of people who were really insane, in conjuction Master Tesla cared more for his work and contributions than his own monetary gain, which is always misunderstood by the greedy masses. Their conclusion we can't understand what he says and he does things that doesn't match our value system, he must be insane. When in reality the moronic masses whose views lead to their own demise are the truely insane, they can't even see how working together for a goal higher than money/power will give us all a better life, and not just benefit a few.
       I know why old men mumble, and I know why Master Tesla did not.

Offline raburgeson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #13 on: September 29, 2007, 03:47:05 AM »
He had views against war and poverty of course they called him insane. They were right there to rob his work when he died, people that worked with him said he had 5 times more unpatented inventions than he did patented. I figure they had space travel immediately after they stole his work. He had his flying car notes and sketches completed. He just didn't want them exposed to anyone that had control of weapons.

Offline Prophmaji

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Re: Cases for Tesla being insane?
« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2007, 04:45:26 AM »
google search for 'the fulford ultimatum", and read a bit about ole' JP Morgan. One of those scumbags that..if he had been butchered at birth..the world would have been a far better place.

In those days, there was NO MONEY OF ANY KIND from anyone BUT the very rich, in terms of securing funding of any kind for research and development. This is the sole reason that Tesla worked with any of these folk. Morgan purposely cornered Tesla, and purposely shut him down. GT Fulford, a Canadian billionare contemporary of Morgan and Westinghouse, was going to fund Tesla's Radiant energy system and was about one week away from buying General Motors and starting the whole thing..when he was assassinated via the first vehicular homicide.

At this point, stop worrying about the old dead scumbags. Work on helping inform the public of the scumbags we have right now.

As for Tesla seeing things, yes that is true.

It is also spectacularly CORRECT AND RIGHT!!!!

You see..the closer you are to true inter-dimenional reality and the truth, in terms of zen or Buddhist KNOWING..the more you will see things like Tesla did.

Tesla said that when he closed his eyes, he saw giant, complex, rotation, evolving, everchanging mandalas.

Have you ever seen photos of a Monk who has the 'knowing' of reality, complete? Do you remember the look on their faces in the photo? And..then..ask yourself..what is the look on the face of Tesla? Identical.

Well, that is the nature of what can be seen, when the truth of multidimensional existence is seen by a mind that is equipped to understand it! Tesla was not only extremely intelligent, he was also psychic. Highly psychic. This much is true as that is what it takes to see the things he saw and bring some of it back. He could see the underlying truth about the interconnectedness of all things in the are of this dimension's 'physical reality' To show what I mean, here's a post of mine, from the 'white gold' thread in the news area:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The alchemical process is as outlined in the bit I last wrote. Apparently, it is that simple. No-one ever said it was difficult to make. What IS properly said, is that fools playing with it can damage or kill themselves playing with it, if they are unprepared. And don't be so damned foolish to think that you can make it, wash it properly so it is clear of any remaining effluents (mercury!!), and then consume it...without going to a place that others will see you as being completely 'mad'. In all seriousness, you might do great harm to yourself.

Here's the issue: Physiologically speaking, when part of the hard wired psychology of the mind needs be reformed, to align with new mental paradigms, the mental and thus chemical aspects of mental 'reformation' can be and ARE SEVERE. A mental 'death' is a real as a physical one. In other words., for you to get your 'fecal matter all in one spot and newly arranged', you LITERALLY MUST die a internal psychological death, thus a rewiring of the mental process in the physical sense and that...on the psychological interpretation by your inner self, WILL be understood as a TRUE death. This is besides all the issues of being able to understand the essence of multidimensional flow and temporal adjuncts to such issues. Multiple timelines, past lives, past existence, astral projection, dimensional projection, temporal anomalies, precognition, future life possibilities, other beings or 'aggregate spirits', singular spirits, etc. And on and on. For example, it can become powerful enough to manifest itself in precognition that shows up as visions of upcoming events, places in multidimensional time..that are 'nexus' points for multiple universes..that show up as 'ripples' in time, that can also be seen from NOW as they are future event paradigms.  What I mean is that a given event may span multiple universes in similar points of possibilities... and that 'event' can be seen as a ripple that stretches backward in time...and happens to be in the particular 'dimensional layer' that the thing you like to call YOU exists within. And you can, if properly prepared, see this event as a reflection, from the future. And it will NOT be exact, it cannot be, as it represent only POSSIBILITY..that becomes far more determinate as you move closer to the event. And your 'interpretation device' that thing you call yourself, or your mental aspects, will impart particular spin or feel into what you 'see'. Only one tiny aspect of it. There are other aspects of manifestation of multidimensionality that are far more interesting and enlightening.

Salvia Divinorium is one material that can illustrate such to a given person. TO give yo an idea, those who have tried such and basically passed out (multiple tries of the mint plant) and returned with ZERO understanding or 'opening of doors' to other possibility, are especially NOT mentally prepared or wired to understand such things. Basically, un-illuminated ground pounders who really don't understand much and are extremely unwilling to attempt to do so.

Be careful here. The vast majority of you, if you were to 'get there' it would be like a 5 year old suddenly appearing at the wheel of a 2-ton car, driving down the freeway at 120mph. A guaranteed disaster!!!

Be it known: NOTHING in your existence today, PERIOD...is even remotely adequate to even begin to illustrate the mental shift that a true understanding of multidimensionality can and will provide. Words, existence itself, is woefully inadequate to even begin such descriptions.

An article that, in the scientific sense, that illustrates that science and religion are once again, about to re-converge to their origins. Nothing new there. They always do.

written in the text I am about to provide, is the problem, as usual. People can't even being to THINK about it without loosing their minds. This is why the Buddhists teach one-on-one. People left to their own devices under the effects of such..can.. and usually do self implode.

One way to say it, one way out of thousands..is to say it is like teaching kittens to swim..by drowning them. Obviously, you are the kitten. Do you think you can swim? Part of the problem is the residual aspects of the monkey brain which interfere with the process. Fear. Fear of loss of physicality, which arises from your current reality paradigm, and the overreach of the hindbrain, in the mechanistic sense of physical reality. 

Basically, I'm talking about largely gaining complete control of the subconscious mind, and all aspects of multidimensionality at the same time. That's a huge endeavor, to say the least. Which is why it should be tackled in stages. This is what the ancient schools, Buddhists, etc all do. Consuming the white gold is likely to be like a crash course, largely akin to being thrown off the roof of a 120 story skyscraper. You'd better figure it out before you hit the ground.


http://freespirits.chosenones.net/showthread.php?p=53850

Parallel universes make quantum sense

19 September 2007
NewScientist.com news service
Zeeya Merali

IF YOU think of yourself as unique, think again. The days when physicists could ignore the concept of parallel universes may have come to an end. If that doesn't send a shudder down your spine, think of it this way: our world is just one of many. You are just one version of many.
David Deutsch at the University of Oxford and colleagues have shown that key equations of quantum mechanics arise from the mathematics of parallel universes. "This work will go down as one of the most important developments in the history of science," says Andy Albrecht, a physicist at the University of California at Davis. In one parallel universe, at least, it will - whether it does in our one remains to be seen.
?This work will go down as one of the most important developments in the history of science?

The "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics was proposed 50 years ago by Hugh Everett, a graduate student at Princeton University. Rather than apply one set of rules to the subatomic quantum world and another to the larger-scale everyday world, as physicists tend to do, Everett wanted to apply quantum mechanical equations to everything. This had some startling consequences.
According to quantum mechanics, particles do not have set properties before they are observed. Instead, particles are described by "wave functions" representing many mutually contradictory properties. It is only when an observer measures a property that the particle somehow settles into one of these multiple options. The paradox is exemplified by Schr?dinger's cat - the famous thought experiment in which a cat in a box can be said to be both alive and dead. It is traditionally thought that the act of observation, opening the box to check the cat, is what forces it to settle into a state, living or dead.
If, as Everett argued, quantum mechanics is applied to the whole universe, then it too should exist in a multitude of separate states. There would be a "multiverse" of parallel universes - one for every physical possibility. So when you open the box holding Schr?dinger's cat, the universe splits, forming two new "yous" - one whose future involves viewing the live cat and the other who sees the dead cat.
Dismissed by the scientific establishment as ridiculous for decades, the many-worlds scenario may at last come in from the cold thanks to Deutsch's work.
The biggest criticism levelled at many worlds was that it seemed to make a puzzle about the outcomes of quantum experiments even worse. Physicists can predict the probability of getting a certain outcome from a quantum experiment from the square of its wave function, according to the Born rule. Nobody can explain why this rule works, it simply fits with experimental observations. The problem was there seemed to be no place for the Born rule in the multiverse. In fact, there didn't seem to be any space for any probabilities at all, says Deutsch.
"You toss a coin, but what does it mean to say that the probability of it coming up heads is 50 per cent?" Deutsch asks. "According to Everett, both outcomes must happen."
In the mid-1990s, Deutsch set out to put the uncertainty we see in quantum mechanical experiments back into the many-worlds scenario. Now, with additional work by Simon Saunders and David Wallace, also at Oxford, he believes they have succeeded. The trick is to examine a quantum experiment while excluding probability theory and accepting the many-worlds interpretation.
The multiverse has a branching structure, created as the universe splits into parallel versions of itself. The thickness of the branches can be calculated solely using deterministic equations, getting around the uncertainties usually associated with quantum physics. What the Oxford gang found is that the branching structure exactly reproduces the peculiar probabilities predicted by the Born rule. The branching also gives the illusion of probabilistic outcomes to measurements.
Deutsch believes this solves the problem of the origin of quantum probability once and for all. "Probabilities used to be regarded as the biggest problem for Everett, but ironically, they are now its most powerful success," he says.
"We've cleared up the obscurities and come up with a pretty clear verdict that Everett works," says Saunders, who is presenting the work with Wallace at the Many Worlds at 50 conference at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, this week. "It's a dramatic turnaround and it means that people now have to discuss Everett seriously."
Albrecht agrees that the work will shake up physicists' worlds. "Many people are uncomfortable about the probabilities at the heart of quantum mechanics and attempt to get rid of quantum mechanics because of it," he says. "But this greatly amplifies the fundamental place of quantum mechanics in our understanding of the physical world."
David Papineau, a philosopher of physics at King's College London, says that he has been converted from scepticism about many worlds to belief, based on its potential to one day solve this puzzle of quantum probabilities. He adds, though, that the work by Deutsch, Wallace and Saunders must now be scrutinised. "It's an ambitious claim and so we have to be careful," he says. For Papineau, the problem is whether a belief in parallel universes should affect the way we live our everyday lives .
Max Tegmark at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has long been a fan of the many-worlds scenario. But while he believes the new work on probability should help convince physicists of its reality, it will never be enough to win over die-hard sceptics. "The critique of many worlds is shifting from 'it makes no sense and I hate it' to simply 'I hate it'," he says.
David Albert, a philosopher of physics at Columbia University, New York, is sceptical. He argues there is good reason to be wary because the Oxford group may be guilty of sleight of hand. "When you first hear about this you feel euphoric," he says. "But then you think, maybe this is too good to be true." He believes that it is irrelevant that Deutsch and his colleagues can show that branching universes give the illusion of probabilistic outcomes to measurements. What we really want to know, says Albert, is why this branching happens in the first place. "They have answered a question, but I think it's the wrong question," he says.
Wojciech Zurek at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico believes that the Born rule is exactly the right question to tackle. However, he believes that it can be answered without resorting to parallel universes. Zurek points out that Everett never used the term "many worlds" in his papers, and says that his work can be interpreted in less controversial ways.
Zurek is also inspired by Everett's ideas, particularly his insight that quantum mechanics must be applied to the entire universe rather than a limited quantum realm. He interprets this to mean that quantum entanglement - the process in which quantum particles can become inextricably linked and act in unison no matter how far apart they are - is a fundamental ingredient of quantum physics. Zurek has already used this property to explain why we see a single objective reality when we make a measurement of a quantum state (New Scientist, 30 June, p 18). Zurek says that entanglement can also be used to derive the Born rule (www.arxiv.org/abs/0707.2832).
"I could not have derived probability without using Everett," says Zurek, who is also presenting his work at the conference. "But at no point am I forced to assign equal reality to all other versions of the universe in the many-worlds scenario."
For Tegmark, the fact that many worlds is sparking such debate, 50 years after its conception, is a triumph in itself. He believes that physicists interested in quantum computing and cosmology are now warming to it. Will the majority be won over? "That depends on what parallel universe you live in," he says.
From issue 2622 of New Scientist magazine, 19 September 2007, page 6-7
Just another universe
Like Schr?dinger's cat, you're locked in a box with a vial of poison gas. If a radioactive atom decays before someone opens the box to observe you, the gas will be released. According to the multiverse picture, in one future "you" will live, because the atom has not decayed, and in another "you" will die. So, should you be worried?
The issue of how we should feel and act when faced with a constantly splitting identity will be addressed by David Papineau of King's College London at a conference on the many-worlds scenario in Waterloo, Canada this week.
To start with, Papineau considers feelings of guilt and hope in the multiverse. Suppose that you are driving recklessly and narrowly avoid crashing into another car. "You might think 'lucky escape', but you should be feeling guilty about the passengers your other self has killed," says Papineau.
He also questions the use of hope. "You hope your football team will win a match, but that's meaningless - they both win and lose," he says.
Although each of our descendant selves is equally real, thankfully Papineau argues that their fates shouldn't affect our choices before we make them. We should be just as reluctant, or excited, about climbing into Schr?dinger's box in the many-worlds picture, as we would be if we believed that only one outcome is actually realised.
Simon Saunders at the University of Oxford doesn't think that Papineau is wrong, but does think he is asking too much of us. "The multiverse will drive you crazy if you really think about how it affects your life, and I can't live like that," he says. His solution? "I'll just accept Everett and then think about something else, to save my sanity."

« Last Edit: September 29, 2007, 05:10:38 AM by Prophmaji »

 

OneLink