I don’t know how stable (They could change over time, or be different in different circumstances) the 5 core beliefs that I describe and argue in this post and my previous post are, however I feel like they are important (some a bit more than others) to me. Also the list of arguments for these beliefs (and of course against them as well, though I haven’t really shown you arguments against these beliefs) is of course a lot larger than I’ll provide in either of these posts. However I hope that these two posts give you some insight into who I am, at least politically/philosophically, and reveal some of the biases that this blog probably has.
1) I belief that equality is important, both in the economical sense as in the equal rights sense. Continue reading My 3 positive core beliefs about the world
I think I have 5 beliefs that fundamentally shape the way I see the world and the way I interact with it. But before I continue, I must write that this self analysis is not based on the concept of core beliefs within psychology, which seems to be more based on beliefs about oneself. Instead the name is just something I came up with to describe 5 beliefs that I hold important in my life.
Here I’ll introduce the two negative beliefs I hold, and in the next post I’ll introduce the 3 positive ones. Continue reading Some of my core beliefs about the world
I’m not angry very often, and I don’t like to be angry. This is something I’ve had ever since my childhood. I even had an period (around the age of 14), that I actively tried to ban all emotions from my mind. It was actually kind of successful and I hope that it didn’t do too much damage to my mental health. Continue reading How I deal with anger, or the way I try to choose the people in my life
The picture you see above is what I usually see when I open an new tab in my Firefox browser (you can also see that I didn’t really follow my own advise. This was due to some mistakes at the start of the new layout of the “tab for a cause” website and the addition of the voting system. I hadn’t really thought about what to vote jet and I had a lot of votes. I had so many votes because of an mistake made by the website earlier. Letting sevral hundred people share the same acount, before acounts where introduced). I installed an app that lets me donate ad revenue the site gets from the ads, you might be able to see the ads in the picture. In the spirit of my previous blog post I decided to share this with you in hopes that it causes us to do more good, in an very easy way that doesn’t really take any effort. For the humanitarian that is also kind of lazy. To make this into at least something resembling an blog post instead of just a shameless commercial I’ll now try to justify why I prioritise certain causes slightly (although not by much) over other causes. Continue reading Tab for a cause post
Let me preface this by saying that, I do believe eating meat is at least slightly wrong, and I don’t buy the argument that we are so much more advanced than animals we cannot count them in our moral calculus, but this is not going to be about whether that is true or false, if you want that you can read some of this. Instead this is going to be a very short essay that I wrote in a short spur of inspiration. Continue reading Why I eat meat
It’s been almost a year since I last wrote on this blog. Some things have happened since then but not that much of note. I mainly went to a lot of debating tournaments among which the world and europeon university championships (sounds like a big deal but it’s not really. The “sport” is pretty small, so if you’re into it you can go to these kind of championships pretty easily).
One of the things that’s changed however is my look on the future. From what I can gather last I wrote I was still aspiring to become a physicist, I do also remember that at the time I didn’t actually enjoy physics anymore and my interest in it might have been slightly fading, I still enjoyed writing about it on this blog and telling people about it. However I no longer enjoyed actually doing physics stuff. This is still true and because of that I don’t think want to do physics related work in the future, I do still intend on finishing my degree mainly because I’ve almost finished it already and I don’t know whether I would ever want to do a degree in something else. But basically I don’t know what I want to do anymore. I however do have a plan on how to find my way again.
I don’t know how much I will write in the future, but I will try to keep this time. At least I’ll try to be a little less picky with the posts that I publish, since there are a ton of posts that I wrote but didn’t publish because I thought they weren’t good enough.
It’s 4 o clock in the morning, for some reason I have the urge to run around for while. I don’t really know why, maybe it’s because my sleep rhythm is kind of weird right now, maybe some other reason. So I go outside to run for a while and I see “oh no it’s raining… oh well I’ll just do a small lap and go home quickly.” While running I continue thinking about economics for a while (because that’s a topic I’ve been thinking, quite a lot about for a while now) when I think “hum the way you think about it right now, that would make a pretty good blog post.” Continue reading Wrong assumptions in free market theory
When I first chose to study physics I did that in part because I thought it would be the best way for me to help humanity as a whole. The reasoning behind this was that research into physics would further human knowledge about the fundamental nature of space, matter and time, which in turn yields technical advances which benefit humanity. Another reason why I thought I would benefit humanity the most by becoming a physicist is that I thought that might be the topic in which I had the most talent, I always was bad in just memorising stuff and physics and math are the research areas where you need to memorise the least amount of things but instead need to have an talent for understanding things and an talent for using logic. Before I end this blogpost I apologise for not posting anything for while.
Idealism and Realism are terms that are used a lot to describe people, political ideas or groups, but a lot of people that use these words don’t really know what they mean. My last post is a good example of what idealism is, a notion that the world and reality are not as constant as they appear to be, that existing structures can be overthrown or changed by ideas or at least depend on how they are interpreted. On the other hand you have realism a notion that the reality or the world does not depend on how we interpret it, that our beliefs and ideas do not affect reality. These two opposites can of course be applied to different things, for example it is a lot easier to have an idealistic notion of society since it is clearly influenced by ideas and beliefs, while it requires a little bit more effort to construct an idealistic notion about the laws of physics. There are lots of other terms like these two that philosophers use to categorise ideas and beliefs, if you want to know more I would suggest starting with searching terms like Determinism and empiricism on either wikipedia or the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Today I’m going to talk about an idea I’ve had for a few years. Before Einstein discovered his theory of general relativity the math behind it, about curved space was already discovered for a while, the same is true with the slow discovery of Quantum mechanics, before that started a lot of the math used to describe it was already discovered. In a universe where the math or the idea is always discovered before it is linked to physical properties one could imagine that the idea itself is the cause of the physical properties. So if you would discover something totally new something noone has ever thought of before that idea would create new laws for our universe to follow. At first thought you would think this doesn’t make any sense aren’t the laws of physics eternal governing over both todays world as that of the past. But once you realise that essential things such as nuclear physics can be explained by simple addition, subtraction, multiplication and division it seems a little more plausible, but then you realise Mathematicians have made a lot more math than is used in physics or other sciences this must certainly be a problem? Well it doesn’t have to be, if you imagine that nature slowly tries to implant every idea into itself but tries to do it in a way that is still consistent with its previous state you would get something that slowly becomes more detailed and detailed, something that also happens to our understanding of the universe. In the end it is impossible to prove or disprove this idea at least it is for me, you could probably go a lot further in trying to if you had access to a lot of data and knew exactly when things where first thought of. Also to see that abstract math like the phibonacci series does find its way into nature check out Spirals Phibonacci and being a plant