5

Sure, it's possible. There are several ways it might happen. Scenario 1: All the particles involved in the Earth suddenly quantum-tunnel somewhere far away. No more Earth. This is the possibility the article mentions. Incredibly unlikely under our current understanding of quantum physics, but possible. Scenario 2: You are living in a simulation. Earth is ...


3

I would not use the word 'dimension'. The problem with this word in this context is that it is used in a very precise mathematical way by physicists, and in this mathematical sense it would certainly not be the claim of sophisticated contemporary panpsychists that mind exists in a different dimension. The clearest contemporary panpsychist statement that I am ...


2

Logically speaking, it is a tautology that things are either alive or not alive, just as it is a tautology that things are blue or not blue, big or not big, courageous or not courageous, idiotic or not idiotic, and this has nothing to do with how anything really is except logic and language. You seem to confuse "dead" and "not alive". ...


1

All equalities by definition require two different things. In 1+1=2, we presume that 1=1. No, they don't. In particular, equivalence relations are defined to be reflexive, allowing you to equate an object with itself. For this reason, the fact that 1=1 follows from the definition of =. Also, the "equality" relation denoted by "=" is ...


1

This question takes some untangling, and the untangling I'm inclined to do will strike some people the wrong way, mostly for the wrong reasons. There's too much politics in science these days. But at any rate... First: 'Scientism' is a particular thing-in-itself that is only tangentially related to any particular philosophy of science. Scientism is a type of ...


1

For the earth's atoms to simultaneously all wink out of existence at the same instant would break the laws of baryon conservation, energy conservation, angular momentum conservation, and linear momentum conservation. A universe where that is possible would be acausal and the probabilities of all possible outcomes in it would not add up to 1. Such a universe ...


1

Tegmark is only a mathematical Platonist and not a full blown Platonist and hence not a Platonist at all given how important a role the forms of the Good and the One play in Plato's philosophy. One Einstein quote says his god was Spinoza's god. As Spinoza simply presented Platonic philosophy in geometric form, one can say that Einstein was a Platonist. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible