I mean seriously, this is 2011 … right? We have these things called computers … right?

Hat-tip to David Bradley for the image.

Yes, I have spent time thinking about this.

Yes. Yes I am a geek.

Moving on ….

If the original is destroyed and recreated, it’d surely be a simple thing to not destroy the original. Then you have two. You take a lump of gold. You teleport it into the other corner of your room, without destroying the original. You do it again and again. Teleportation don that way basically means cloning of objects/animals/whatever.

So teleporting humans would surely mean murder on a grand scale.

Perhaps all the atoms of the subject being teleported would be transported to the destination. Then no cloning? But why not? If you have a stash of atoms close at hand (like ummm the world, given that atoms make up everything) you can create/recreate the subject from that. Also, transmitting all the subject’s matter would be a more difficult and costly proposition than just the information on how to put it together – which would have to accompany even the subject’s original matter, so you wouldn’t save anything there. And finally, I would think that sending all that matter through space would run the risk of contamination – like in the movie The Fly

So a few problems with that.

How else could we travel super-fast or for all intents and purposes instantaneously? A bloke I knew years ago was keen on “accelerating gravity” (his words) as propulsion. Kind of an interesting idea. I don’t know how he elaborated it, but I got to thinking (geek, remember? ). Gravity affects/warps space-time, right? For the extreme of that, look at black holes. So, could we – once we understand gravity sufficiently, deliberately warp space time so that there is here; far is near?

Problem with this is the “time” bit of spacetime. If we could warp spacetime in physical dimensions, we could surely warp (and move through) time. Then you get all the usual paradoxes and problems with time travel.

So maybe we won’t be able to teleport.

It put me in mind of an Asimov story revolving around te development of a time viewer, that coul view any point aroun the world at any time in the past. The implication of course was that if you take a small enough fraction of time, the past is basically the present – so it was real-time surveillance. It’s a totally different thing, I know, but similar in that there are further implications to anything. The obvious might be so awesome we forget to think about them, but they can be important.

Perplexity is a measurement in information theory. It is defined as b raised to the power of entropy in base b, or more often as b raised to the power of cross-entropy in base b. The latter definition is commonly used to compare probability models.

Amusingly, I find that definition causes me no small amount of perplexity Anyway, on to the subjects of today’s post … (skip to part the second if you just want the light hearted and sciencey sections):

Part the First

First, something posted by Monica at Monicks.net. I would advise not following the link if you have children or are just a gentle-hearted and empathic person, as it’s really awful and sad. Essentially, a poverty-stricken couple sacrificed (brutally) their 4 year old daughter at the urging of some shithead of a tantrik (exorcist). The reason they did this? To get rich. I don’t get it. For a start, the fact that they believed that killing their child would bring them material wealth is fucked enough – but no matter how poverty-stricken one might be, to kill one’s child in order to get out of that poverty? I cannot wrap my head around such a horrifying callous disregard for life, for a child – and not just any child, but for their own daughter.

Horrifying.

Part the Second

Secondly, homeopaths. Now I know I’ve talked about not being a dick, but to be honest I don’t know how successful I’ll be at that. I promise (sort of) that I’ll try (maybe) to be not-a-dick, but … it’s homeopathy; it’ll be pretty hard. Anyhoo, this was something I was led to by Medtek: a homeopathic proving of … wait for it … water.

…

… ok, have you all quite finished laughing? It wasn’t normal water, you know (plain old H2O); this was “aquanova” – made by combining hydrogen with, well, with oxygen actually. But it’s a different sort of H2O, obviously, because the next step is to dilute this new special water in … water … and shake it a few times, and dilute in more … water … and repeat until there’s none of the original … water … left, and you just have  … water.

…

I’ll probably have to wait a bit longer for you all to stop laughing at this point – and take the opportunity to marshall my not-being-a-dick forces, which appear to have scattered. Something this really leads me to wonder: do homeopaths actually believe this? I mean srsly, anyone who can say this with a straight face either believes it, or they’re a con-artist. To be honest I don’t know which I would think worse. While the con-artist notion would be reprehensible, awful, and dangerous, at least it would be understandable in light of at least some human beings’ tendency to take advantage of others. On the other hand, if they really truly believe that water is different from water, and when you dilute it in water until there’s only water left, and no water, that you get a remedy that will treat something (what, I don’t know) … I just don’t know how to even begin to approach it.  It’s not about not knowing science; it’s about believing something that flies in the face of logic itself (of course yes it does also fly in the face of every bit of science around – being that it is actually magic they believe in). – And of course it’s still dangerous.

Part the Third

Thirdly, the sciencey-cool thing: How smart do you need to be to collapse a wave function?

Particles are literally in many places at once, each with some probability. Take an electron and fire it at a screen with two slits cut through it, and astonishingly, the electron will go through both slits simultaneously. But suppose you set up a pair of cameras to monitor which slit the electron goes through and suddenly – poof – the “wave function collapses” and it really goes through only one of the two.  Somehow observing the system directly affects it.

So far so weird (and perplexing) but then:

In 1978, John Wheeler proposed his “delayed choice” experiment in which a detector was set up to observe the slits after a particle had already passed through it, and this experiment was actually performed a few years ago.  It turns out that you can retroactively force the wave function to collapse.  That is messed up.

Yeah it’s messed up. The electron goes through both slits, but then you observe the slits afterwards, and suddenly the electron only went through one of them. In. The. Past.

That sound you just heard? That was your brain breaking. Mine did it already. Don’t worry, there’s plenty you can do without a brain: watch The View, for instance.

But where teh fork are teh forkz?

Not long back we could haz new cutleryz – yah: including forkz. Hole droor wuz full. Now full of knifez (maybe even moar den befoar) but no forkz. To has forkz lolshrink had to go over other hole side of bilding and get teh last wun from bored-room (only room in plaice wiv proper name: meating room hav no meat innit; assess room have no donkeyz; at least bored room hav right name).

I has bin tolled we no can has any moar cutlery, bcos not inpayshint service … But I is inpayshint – and the moar times i can has no forkz, the moar inpayshint I be!

An srsly, what happin 2 all forkz? It like sumwun take them, but that make no sense: why take forkz? An why leaf knifez an spoonz?

Yumans R strange. Or maybe it this cutlergeist I see moovie about: it could take forkz an stuffs. That make cutlergeist strange.

Generally though, we accept these magical things in kids’ stories. Well, not if we’re Richard Dawkins we don’t, but I digress We accept them in fantasy fiction as well, even as adults, because we’re clear about fiction vs non-fiction; we know when we’re reading a fairytale and when it’s reality.

Don’t we?

Apparently not, given the widespread belief – among adults – in magic and ghosts. You know: those things that even Scooby Doo debunks.

I was in our lunchroom at work yesterday (somewhat unusual, but then again it was 2:30 or so, so I figure it was reasonable for me to have some lunch ) and a couple of members of another team were in there. I didn’t stay long, but long enough to hear one of them telling the other – quite seriously – about someone she knew (not a patient) who supposedly sees spirits or similar.

This is a person who works in a psychiatric service. We treat people who see things. We give them antipsychotic medication. And these people were happily discussing someone who sees spirits – and accepting completely that this person did in fact see things that were actually there.

If someone told me they saw dead people my response would be along the lines of: “you should really see someone about that”. That’s not just because I’m an ebil psychiatrist either; most of my family and friends would have the same response. Nor is it that they’re all scientists, sceptics, or philosophers – most of them aren’t. It’s just that sensible rational people know that dead people are dead. Sorry. Game over. They don’t hang around to talk to mediums and psychics; they don’t hang around at all, as far as we have ever been able to ascertain.

And yet there are legions of people who have a different response, along the lines of: “let me open my wallet; you just reach on in there and have a blast. Knock yourself out. Then tell me my dead loved one is watching over me.”

Somehow these people forgot, or never learnt, what even young kids figure out: magic is a trick. Apparently supernatural things are simply things that the person experiencing them doesn’t understand. And the fact that Jim-Bob and Darlene don’t understand what made the real bright light outside their trailer doesn’t mean it was an alien spacecraft. Sure, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t, but is that really reason to believe it was?

That’s what really puzzles me: that so many people are ready to believe things for what seem to me such flimsy reasons. While I totally accept that there are many things we do not know with certainty, I do not understand why anyone’s response to that lack of certainty would be to believe in things that go against all science and reason – and in which even a child and Scooby Doo abandon belief.

I used to believe there was something to acupuncture. I had a reason for that: my grandmother (an intelligent rational person) studied and practiced it, and my parents (a science teacher and a psychiatrist) would press on the odd point when they had a headache or something. The thing is however, when I actually delved into it a bit more, I realised that it went totally against the scientific evidence, and I had engaged in special pleading in an attempt to reconcile it with the medical science I had learnt.

As a result, I Changed. My. Mind.

I realised the reason I believed was insufficient, and I therefore abandoned that belief in energy magic. The point of that little blither is that I guess I recognise that people have reasons for their beliefs, and as different people, we have different reasons for those beliefs. What I don’t get, is the inability (or unwillingness?) of many people to change their views. When presented with evidence against, their beliefs in various forms of magic don’t weaken in the slightest.

In fact, even where evidence is lacking for or against, I would argue the logical position is not to believe. Not to disbelieve, to believe it false … but simply not to believe.

But I guess that’s just me

I guess since I’m so comfortable with not knowing in an absolute sense, that I forget how distressing that seems to be for many people – which could well be why they cleave to doctrines or people that purport to have certain truth – or at least a certain-sounding reassurance. Logic and reality aren’t really in the reassuring business, unfortunately.

Personally though, I find the wonder wonderful, and think it sad that some others feel the need to clutter it up with magic.