Has anyone tried the OpenAI ChatGPT?

[heymike3]

What is the cosmic web?

The cosmic web is a large-scale structure of the universe, composed of galaxies and intergalactic gas, dark matter, and dark energy, that is interconnected by filaments of dense matter. The filaments form a complex network that defines the large-scale distribution of matter in the universe. The concept of the cosmic web is a key element in the current understanding of the structure and evolution of the universe.

Who has theorized that this is part of a larger structure?

The concept of the cosmic web was first proposed by the theoretical astrophysicist and cosmologist, Yakov Zeldovich in the 1970s. Zeldovich, along with other researchers, developed numerical simulations of structure formation in the universe that showed that matter would clump together in a web-like pattern, with dense knots (galaxies) connected by filaments of dark matter and gas. Since then, the cosmic web has been widely studied and confirmed through various observational and theoretical studies in astrophysics and cosmology.

[T_aquaticus]

@heymike3

I cannot remember if you ruled out the possibility of quantum indeterminacy affecting mental states or vice versa.

I am asking you. Do you think a Carbon-14 atom chooses to decay?

[heymike3]

I don’t have any reason to think that it does. None at all.

Are you thinking that it might?

[T_aquaticus]

@Andy7

These questions about determinism and quantum physics relate to the idea of True Random Number Generators (TRNGs). ChatGPT probably uses random numbers in some way that it appears to be making choices. The thing is that all random number generators in computer software are Pseudo-Random Number Generators (PRNGs). They rely on a “seed”, which is a really hard-to-predict small piece of data (often a combination of a high-precision clock, so-called “one-way” functions, or other data), then generate a stream of random numbers with a hard-to-reverse algorithm.

I use the random module in Python from time to time, so I have experience with what you are describing. Random seeds are especially useful in data science because it allows others to repeat your work, one of the pillars of science.

@Andy7

But there are proposals to build TRNGs from quantum computers via qubits, which rely on the apparently fundamentally random nature of quantum mechanics.

Tying back to an earlier post, you can purchase a true random number generator that uses radioactive decay. Interestingly, they have “Conscious Monkey Technologies” printed on the board.

https://www.imagesco.com/kits/random-number-generator.html

[T_aquaticus]

@heymike3

I don’t have any reason to think that it does. None at all.

So even if something happens in an instant, it isn’t evidence of something making a choice, right?

[heymike3]

My turn

Please refresh my memory if you ruled out the possibility of quantum indeterminacy affecting mental states or vice versa

[T_aquaticus]

@heymike3

Please refresh my memory if you ruled out the possibility of quantum indeterminacy affecting mental states or vice versa

I think it is the evidence that rules out quantum indeterminacy. Neurobiology takes place at a very big level in a very messy environment which wouldn’t allow for quantum coherence or entanglement to have an effect.

[heymike3]

@T_aquaticus

I think it is the evidence that rules out quantum indeterminacy.

I don’t understand what evidence you are referring to

[heymike3]

@T_aquaticus

Neurobiology takes place at a very big level in a very messy environment which wouldn’t allow for quantum coherence or entanglement to have an effect.

I also think that this messiness or chaos is the dust from which conscious determination emerges

[T_aquaticus]

@heymike3

I don’t understand what evidence you are referring to

It would be the sentence right after the one you quoted.

[heymike3]

That appears circular

[T_aquaticus]

@heymike3

That appears circular

Pointing out that the biology of neurons is to large, messy, slow, and hot to be affected by quantum indeterminacy is not a circular argument.

[heymike3]

It certainly looks like it when you see it as evidence that it cannot happen

[glipsnort (Steve Schaffner)]

@heymike3

It certainly looks like it when you see it as evidence that it cannot happen

How? We know the distance, energy, etc scales at which QM effects become important and we know what scales cellular chemistry operates on. The latter either permits the former or they don’t. In neither case would the argument be circular.

[heymike3]

It’s a valid form of skepticism in response to what was said earlier in the thread regarding the question of conscious determination:

@T_aquaticus

@Dale

So we can conclude mouse cardiomyocytes were controlling your subconscious.

Sad, but true.

[heymike3]

@glipsnort

How?

If you are not questioning whether or not you can make choices, then I don’t think we have any disagreement on this subject.

[glipsnort (Steve Schaffner)]

@heymike3

If you are not questioning whether or not you can make choices, then I don’t think we have any disagreement on this subject.

I’m questioning your statement that @T_aquaticus was making a circular argument about QM.

[heymike3]

Can you restate his argument?

[glipsnort (Steve Schaffner)]

Mental states are a product of neurobiology. Neurobiology operates in a regime in which quantum indeterminacy is not relevant. Therefore, quantum indeterminacy is not involved in mental states.

[heymike3]

There’s something in my conversation with @T_aquaticus that I can’t put my finger on for you at this moment.

Yet, I find myself wondering whether there has been an experiment to confirm whether there is a quantum change that occurs relative to when a person makes a decision.