[Misc] The Butterfly Effect

[jimhigham]

Has nobody said “ees complicated” yet?

We really are moving on.

 

[Swansman]

Legend has it that Hitler was on the end of an allied rifle when he was a runner during WWI but he was unarmed so they let him go, changing the world forever.

If true, this act of mercy may have eventually costs hundreds of millions of lives.

The thing with the butterfly effect though is that there's several outcomes based on these alternative timelines.

Yes, quite possibly a hundred million lives or so would have been saved in the short term. But the World War II also resulted in a lot of changes in philosophy, humanitarian values, technological & medical research and so forth that may (or may not) have saved as many lives. Would that have happened without WW2? No way to know. Similarly, if those changes did not happen due to WWII, maybe the environment would be better and possibly lives would have been saved in the future. It is not particularly straight forward... it is impossible to predict what would have happened with no Adolf Hitler starting a war, or no Columbus finding America, or if the bloke who wrote Enuma Elis never existed.

 

[Swansman]

So if you don't believe in free will or randomness, I take it you're religious and believe that all life has a set design and a predetermined destiny?

Free will is a very religious idea.

Early human civilisations were obsessed with the idea of a dying and resurrecting God, which represented the winter (death of plants = food, etc.) and the resurrection (spring). They thought that if you kill the king (the human incarnation of a God) when he is sick, growth would improve. Ancient Mesopotamia and Israel and so forth had festivals based on this idea. For example Mesopotamia had the festival of Zagmuk where they selected a king at the beginning, had him f*** a priestess near the end, and killed him at the end.

Nature ruled. Not free will. But perhaps the impact of the powerful Gods and humans could have some effect on nature - though never overrule it. This made some sense, but the kings didn't like it (because if people had a shite year, they'd kill him) and wanted to put more emphasis on the living aspects of the God.
This is for instance the Bible God. He doesn't live or die, he just has stern rules and if you f*** with him, he'll f*** with you. This is how over a few thousand years we moved from Nature is God (who may have a physical or mythical representation) to God is God. (this is the short version by the way, it is more complex and fascinating).
The concept of free will was unheard of until the 1500s because everyone assumed that if you don't do certain things like harvest your crops or f*** sparsely, you die or suffer... which was also the case unless you were close to the King/god. No free will: just survival.

But in the 1500s, Isaac Luria came with a different idea which sort of brought the myth of the dying God back. He said that the progress of human intellectualism is the evolution of God getting to know himself - ultimately resulting in humans reaching the conclusion that man is God, and therefore writes his own history, and has his free will.

This is where the free will concept comes from. Contrary to what some believe, Luria did however not reject God itself - he just rejected that the God from the Bible rules us. Rather, we are incarnations of the dying God (who has had various names in various cultures but are now perhaps mostly known as Lucifer) who seeks liberty from the evil perma-God from the Bible.

The idea that there is "free will" may or may not be true, but it is undoubtedly a religious concept - before some... illuminating... societies spread the idea of man as God/ free will through the "Enlightenment", there was no doubt that we were slaves under nature and/or God/Gods controlling nature.

Personally, I am inclined to believe that nature (which includes our biology) is our ruler. We have very little free will, and were fooled by Luciferians into believing in the nonsense ideas of liberty, freedom, free thought and so forth.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

They say that if a butterfly flaps its wings in the Amazonian rain forest, Zaha goes over in the box

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

One for human science nerds.

Whilst listening to the Radio Sussex this week, our Warren said that if we had made the Quarter Finals of the League Cup we would have been away to Manchester United. I thought about it and came to the conclusion that we may not have done. In fact, the draw would likely have been completely different. Added to that, lives may have been completely different. In some cases life and death.

This is because I believe that almost all time and movement is affected by a single small action through a trickle effect that travels fast. And the conversations around the game would have been different. The actions and movements of every individual. The threads on NSC may have been different. Me writing this is altering the course of your life.

I looked this theory up and it appears to be known as the 'butterfly effect'

I apologise if this means that, by reading this, some of you may not meet future partners, and take thanks in advance for those of you that do.

But surely my theory is correct is it not ?

Have you been smoking?

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I always think of this when fans debate the effects of a referee decision.

"If the penalty had been given, the score would have been 2-1 not 1-1"

Complete bollocks (even if the penalty had been scored).
An obvious example of the butterfly effect, every player would have played differently at 2-1 than they would at 1-1.
It's impossible to assess what the final outcome would be, from changing a single event.

 

[SweatyMexican]

If my nan had balls she’d be my grandad.

But yes, it would’ve changed the draw…probably.

 

[BN41Albion]

I always think of this when fans debate the effects of a referee decision.

"If the penalty had been given, the score would have been 2-1 not 1-1"

Complete bollocks (even if the penalty had been scored).
An obvious example of the butterfly effect, every player would have played differently at 2-1 than they would at 1-1.
It's impossible to assess what the final outcome would be, from changing a single event.

Agree. To me it seems so obvious it amazes me how often you hear examples like this

 

[Hugo Rune]

I have a different view, I believe that everything that has ever happened and will ever happen has a cause and that it was and is inevitable, from the moment of the big bang. There is no if, this or that happened, because they didn't and never would have. I don't believe in free will, and I don't believe anything is random, even if it is entirely unpredictable.

This is block universe theory where every event has a time/space coordinate in a Universe that is unchanging because everything that has ever happened or will happened exists. But this is just a mono reality. There is only one way of things happening, it does not sit well with quantum mechanics.

A lot less comforting is multiverse theory where for each event, a new universe is created for the alternative action. Infinity is built into this theory so that leads to the inevitable conclusion that there is a version of myself in some Universe that supports Palace. I find these type of thoughts deeply disturbing.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Legend has it that Hitler was on the end of an allied rifle when he was a runner during WWI but he was unarmed so they let him go, changing the world forever.

If true, this act of mercy may have eventually costs hundreds of millions of lives.

On the flip side I would never have been born without Hitler. My Grandad was an English soldier who met my Nan, an Italian girl in Naples when he was passing through/resting/stationed there during the Italian campaign.

There are probably many, many people all over the world similar to me whose parents/grandparents were thrown together because of the war. I doubt we outnumber those who lost their lives though.

 

[1066familyman]

One for human science nerds.

Whilst listening to the Radio Sussex this week, our Warren said that if we had made the Quarter Finals of the League Cup we would have been away to Manchester United. I thought about it and came to the conclusion that we may not have done. In fact, the draw would likely have been completely different. Added to that, lives may have been completely different. In some cases life and death.

This is because I believe that almost all time and movement is affected by a single small action through a trickle effect that travels fast. And the conversations around the game would have been different. The actions and movements of every individual. The threads on NSC may have been different. Me writing this is altering the course of your life.

I looked this theory up and it appears to be known as the 'butterfly effect'

I apologise if this means that, by reading this, some of you may not meet future partners, and take thanks in advance for those of you that do.

But surely my theory is correct is it not ?

You are, are you not?, Russell Harty in disguise.

I claim my five pounds.

 

[rogersix]

Free will is a very religious idea.

Early human civilisations were obsessed with the idea of a dying and resurrecting God, which represented the winter (death of plants = food, etc.) and the resurrection (spring). They thought that if you kill the king (the human incarnation of a God) when he is sick, growth would improve. Ancient Mesopotamia and Israel and so forth had festivals based on this idea. For example Mesopotamia had the festival of Zagmuk where they selected a king at the beginning, had him f*** a priestess near the end, and killed him at the end.

Nature ruled. Not free will. But perhaps the impact of the powerful Gods and humans could have some effect on nature - though never overrule it. This made some sense, but the kings didn't like it (because if people had a shite year, they'd kill him) and wanted to put more emphasis on the living aspects of the God.
This is for instance the Bible God. He doesn't live or die, he just has stern rules and if you f*** with him, he'll f*** with you. This is how over a few thousand years we moved from Nature is God (who may have a physical or mythical representation) to God is God. (this is the short version by the way, it is more complex and fascinating).
The concept of free will was unheard of until the 1500s because everyone assumed that if you don't do certain things like harvest your crops or f*** sparsely, you die or suffer... which was also the case unless you were close to the King/god. No free will: just survival.

But in the 1500s, Isaac Luria came with a different idea which sort of brought the myth of the dying God back. He said that the progress of human intellectualism is the evolution of God getting to know himself - ultimately resulting in humans reaching the conclusion that man is God, and therefore writes his own history, and has his free will.

This is where the free will concept comes from. Contrary to what some believe, Luria did however not reject God itself - he just rejected that the God from the Bible rules us. Rather, we are incarnations of the dying God (who has had various names in various cultures but are now perhaps mostly known as Lucifer) who seeks liberty from the evil perma-God from the Bible.

The idea that there is "free will" may or may not be true, but it is undoubtedly a religious concept - before some... illuminating... societies spread the idea of man as God/ free will through the "Enlightenment", there was no doubt that we were slaves under nature and/or God/Gods controlling nature.

Personally, I am inclined to believe that nature (which includes our biology) is our ruler. We have very little free will, and were fooled by Luciferians into believing in the nonsense ideas of liberty, freedom, free thought and so forth.

cheers swanny, some very interesting reading for a sunday morning, ta!

all your own research, or structured learning?

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Shit happens.

 

[Swansman]

cheers swanny, some very interesting reading for a sunday morning, ta!

all your own research, or structured learning?

Bit of both... keen interest in how humanity/society has turned into what it is today (finding the consistencies throughout history and how these have developed or changed) which made me a bit of a history nerd (in some regards; not that into wars and specific years of kings and all that), along with some thinking.

Glad you find it interesting - I think it is as well. Funny analysing the foundations and structures - things really aren't as random, coincidental and unconnected as it may sometimes feel.

 

[Change at Barnham]

On the flip side I would never have been born without Hitler. My Grandad was an English soldier who met my Nan, an Italian girl in Naples when he was passing through/resting/stationed there during the Italian campaign.

There are probably many, many people all over the world similar to me whose parents/grandparents were thrown together because of the war. I doubt we outnumber those who lost their lives though.

Did your Grandad return after the war ended to collect her? At what point did they marry? It sounds a very romantic story.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Did your Grandad return after the war ended to collect her? At what point did they marry? It sounds a very romantic story.

Yes, they stayed in touch as he progressed up Italy and came back for her once the war was over. I'm not sure if they married in 45 or 46 but they moved to England at the same time and my mum was born a bit later in 47.

 

[Baldseagull]

This is block universe theory where every event has a time/space coordinate in a Universe that is unchanging because everything that has ever happened or will happened exists. But this is just a mono reality. There is only one way of things happening, it does not sit well with quantum mechanics.

A lot less comforting is multiverse theory where for each event, a new universe is created for the alternative action. Infinity is built into this theory so that leads to the inevitable conclusion that there is a version of myself in some Universe that supports Palace. I find these type of thoughts deeply disturbing.

Yeah, my universe is not very exotic.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

 

[portlock seagull]

So, if my auntie had bollocks…?

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

So, if my auntie had bollocks…?

According to Baldseagull, she was clearly predestined to have bollocks.