ArcoBlood Mod Finished

[Arryn]

quantum_mechani said:
Not necessarily, you can create your own game and still have fun playing, particularly with a random element.

To an omniscient being, there's no such thing as "random". Which path an event chain might take might be random, but the being would already, in advance, know which path will be taken. It's the very definition of the term "omniscient": knowing the outcome. All possible outcomes and which one, specifically, will come to pass. Logically, then, where's the fun in waiting for what you already know will happen?

[quantum_mechani]

Arryn said:

To an omniscient being, there's no such thing as "random". Which path an event chain might take might be random, but the being would already, in advance, know which path will be taken. It's the very definition of the term "omniscient": knowing the outcome. All possible outcomes and which one, specifically, will come to pass. Logically, then, where's the fun in waiting for what you already know will happen?

I suppose it depends on your definition of omniscient. I was defining it as knowing all that is happening, not all that will happen.

[Arryn]

quantum_mechani said:
I suppose it depends on your definition of omniscient. I was defining it as knowing all that is happening, not all that will happen.

Cause and effect. If you know *all* that is happening *right now*, then you will know what *will* happen. "All" is a very encompassing term. When one argues philosophy, then little details like the meanings of almost every word used in the discussion becomes important. It's necessary so that both/all parties in the discussion are using a common frame of reference. Otherwise, one gets the morass that's common when people argue religion ...

No, I'm not picking on you, in case you're wondering. If anything, I'm picking on this very-much-gone-astray thread, which was ostensibly about a mod, and has been hijacked into an ethics and philosophy debate.

[TheSelfishGene]

I like to think that the thread "evolved" . But yea, these sorts of discussions go on every day by the thousands throughout the net, and aren't appropriate here. But sometimes your bored and just can't resist .

[Graeme Dice]

Arryn said:
Cause and effect. If you know *all* that is happening *right now*, then you will know what *will* happen.

That's assuming that the universe is completely deterministic, which is possible, but not necessarily true.

Anyways, on the topic of the Arco Blood Mod, if somebody is interested, I'll be starting up another "Modded Nations Only" game in the near future, and this one would be an excellent choice.

[quantum_mechani]

Arryn said:

Cause and effect. If you know *all* that is happening *right now*, then you will know what *will* happen.

Actually, that only holds for classical physics. Following quantum mechanics, a particle can be in more than one state at once. It is not until it affects something that it solidifies into single state. Thus you could know the states of all the various particles at a single moment, but not know what will happen.

[Arryn]

quantum_mechani said:
Actually, that only holds for classical physics. Following quantum mechanics, a particle can be in more than one state at once. It is not until it affects something that it solidifies into single state. Thus you could know the states of all the various particles at a single moment, but not know what will happen.

I think you meant to say "until it is observed", not "affects something".

Any entity that might be able to know the quantum states of every particle in the multiverse might also not be subject to our current understanding (aka physics) of how probability waves collapse. By definition, if you "know" the quantum state of a particle you've already collapsed its wave. We're positing a deity that can observe at the quantum level without interacting (affecting) what's being observed (something we don't currently believe is possible). Another way of looking at this is that according to quantum mechanics you cannot have an all-knowing deity. Which means that either one believes in such a deity and quantum mechanics is wrong, or the science is correct and what many modern religions posit is absurd. I've never been fond of the absurd ... especially my current theocratic government.

[quantum_mechani]

Arryn said:

I think you meant to say "until it is observed", not "affects something".

Any entity that might be able to know the quantum states of every particle in the multiverse might also not be subject to our current understanding (aka physics) of how probability waves collapse. By definition, if you "know" the quantum state of a particle you've already collapsed its wave. We're positing a deity that can observe at the quantum level without interacting (affecting) what's being observed (something we don't currently believe is possible). Another way of looking at this is that according to quantum mechanics you cannot have an all-knowing deity. Which means that either one believes in such a deity and quantum mechanics is wrong, or the science is correct and what many modern religions posit is absurd. I've never been fond of the absurd ... especially my current theocratic government.

Fair enough, it goes back to the definition of omniscient. If knowing the states of every particle at a single moment is not omniscient, it still seems rather impressive and god-like, so what do you call it?

[Arryn]

quantum_mechani said:
Fair enough, it goes back to the definition of omniscient. If knowing the states of every particle at a single moment is not omniscient, it still seems rather impressive and god-like, so what do you call it?

Fantasy. Absurd. (take your pick)