One initial thought after “getting it” was this; true or not, this knowledge is totally useless. The reason I thought so was that part of what I “got” was realizing no one is doing anything, and if “doing” is illusory so is “usefulness”. Without “doer” there is of course no “user”. Simple as that. What I got was the notion of one single agent, and that is One. In other words, whatever is “happening”, it is done by the universe, and all other notions of agency are only relatively true. Whatever seemingly separate agent we come up with e.g. an electron, my dog, the sun, gravitation, God and ultimately my Self, all are done by the One Universe. Ok, and then what?
Then it is so, that’s what!
In my previous post I highlighted a consequence related to this idea of mine. If there is only one universe, and the universe follows Einstein’s GR as originally formulated and reformulated by Penrose and Hawkings, then a singularity is inevitably an aspect of the universal process. Assuming this singularity preceeds a series of events described as of increasing complexity, then the singularity itself can be assumed to be of less complexity, and since the current state of affairs is obviously of extreme complexity, the singularity is reasonably of equal magnitude simplicity. I find no valid reason that could not be the case. If we imagine extreme simplicity, it is not far fetched to find arguments for this simplicity to also be of very little freedom. Following the extreme theme, we can allow ourselves, just for arguments sake, to assume singularity to experience zero degrees of freedom. Not being a statistician, I google around a bit and I find this:
No degree of freedom and effective sample size
Figure 1 shows that there is one relationship under investigation (r = 1) when there are two variables. In the scatterplot where there is only one datum point. The analyst cannot do any estimation of the regression line because the line can go in any direction, as shown in Figure 1.In other words, there isn’t any useful information.
Figure 1. No degree of freedom with one datum point.
When the degree of freedom is zero (df = n – r = 1 – 1 = 0), there is no way to affirm or reject the model! In this sense, the data have no “freedom” to vary and you don’t have any “freedom” to conduct research with this data set. Put it bluntly, one subject is basically useless, and obviously, df defines the effective sample size (Eisenhauer, 2008).
So if we take space and time to be the two variables, and the one relationship observed to be of these two, then we get useless information that can neither affirm, nor reject our model. Is this bad?
To me it isn’t, because it validates my “getting it” and like anyone else, I’m comfortable with being validated. I love it to be honest.
One universe, determined by singularity that has zero degrees of freedom means perhaps that it is impossible to predict from inside, as being an aspect of that which is One process. Who would think superdeterminism is determined to being impossible to confirm or reject?
I did! It makes sense of our inability to pin this thing down once and for all.
All data will confirm and reject our models, at once, but only if there are zero degrees of freedom in play. If there was any true choise, we would perhaps be able to figure out how decision comes about.
It seems we’re not, and it’s not because we’re stupid. it is because we are determined to be intelligent.