這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。
（安：我發覺大部分世人，也不願意接受別人的意見。有時，我所給予的，甚至並不是什麼「意見」，而只是一點事實的陳述，世人仍然不肯聽。
例如，某甲可能以為「蘋果一定是紅色的」。於是，我說出正確的版本給他聽：「有些蘋果是青綠色的。」但是，大部分情況下，不知何故，甲仍然會認為，「蘋果一定是紅色的」。我的感覺是，彷彿在他心目中，我是一個瘋子，任何說話也不值一聽。
而最令我意外的，是我給予的「基本事實陳述」，即使只要做簡單的實驗、考證 或 資料搜集，就可以判斷真偽，甲仍然會無動於衷，寧願花一生的時間，去相信一大堆流言。）
大部分世人 人云亦云、先入為主、寧信流言、不愛事實。必須和他們相處的話，你亦一定要十分小心。稍一不慎，隨時會給他們的「反科學態度」「害死」。
— Me@2012.05.09
2012.05.09 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
時間態 4
Death is a decoherence of the mind.
Mind is an explicit (coherent) superposition of eigenstates.
After death, it still exists in the environment.
— Me@2012-04-15 11:36:41 PM
2012.05.06 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
Consciousness
Infinite regress in consciousness is the formation of an infinite series of “inner observers” as we ask the question of who is observing the output of the neural correlates of consciousness in the study of subjective consciousness.
— Wikipedia on Infinite regress
2012.05.05 Saturday ACHK
Inferiority complex is due to the failure of realizing that you are not a part of the universe, but the whole of universe.
You are a layer of the whole universe.
— Me@2012-04-25 12:28:32 PM
2012.05.04 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。
現時的「大眾教育」模式是，在同一時間，一位教師對著一大班學生講課。那樣的教育成效，通常也不大。試想想，即使只對著一個人說話，要保證聽方明白，沒有誤解，就已經相當困難。
「對話」其實是一個互相 Model（建構思想模型）的過程。你我對話時，我是根據你的說話，推斷你的 思考結構 和 心理狀態 大概怎樣，從而將你的「思想模型」，安裝在我腦海中的一個「虛擬機器」之中。簡單一點講，我的腦海之中，會有一個「虛擬的你」，反之亦然。那樣，我就可以估計，下一句說話，應該對你講什麼。
隨著你我對話句子數目的增加，我腦中「虛擬的你」，就會越來越接近真實的你。而我所選擇的說話，亦會越來越令你共鳴。換句話說，你最終也會明白，我究竟在講什麼。
當我心中「虛擬的你」，非常接近真實的你，而你心中「虛擬的我」，又十分接近我的真身時，你我就為之「有默契」。
— Me@2012.05.03
2012.05.03 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
Windows, 3.2 | Copy Me, 4.2
這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。
.
這就是重點是：那沒有一個，一定的標籤方法。那要視乎上文下理。相對於一個情境之下，哪一個標籤比較方便，就用那一個。
自我身份問題，有同樣的特性。如果我問「怎樣為之『同一個』自我」，雖然有一個，相對客觀的標籤方法，但都沒有一個，百份之一百，絕對客觀的標準答案。
例如，「十年前的我」和「今天的我」，外貌稍有不同，性格不盡相似，年齡天壤之別。那樣，他們還算不算是「同一個」自我呢？
除了「取最方便有用」的標籤方法以外，另一個可以使用的標準，是 DNA（遺傳基因）。「十年前的我」和「今天的我」，無論有多大不同，至起碼，「他們」的遺傳基因，會百份百相同。這就是我所指「相對客觀的標籤方法」。這亦大概可以說是，法律上的定義。
但是，孖生兄弟都可以「遺傳基因百份百相同」。但你總不可以把他們，定義為「同一個」人，因為他們根本是兩個人。或者說，他們可以同一刻時間，在兩個不同的地方出現。所以，即使用了遺傳基因的異同，來辨別「是否『同一個』人」，也未能給你「一個百份之一百，絕對客觀的標準答案」。
— Me@2012.04.29
.
.
2012.04.29 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
Residual self-image is the concept that individuals tend to think of themselves as projecting a certain physical appearance, or certain position of social entitlement, or lack thereof. The term was used at least as early as 1968, but was popularized in fiction by the Matrix series, where persons who existed in a digitally created world would subconsciously maintain the physical appearance that they had become accustomed to projecting.
— Wikipedia on Self-image
2012.04.26 Thursday ACHK
Windows, 3 | Copy Me, 4
這段改編自 2010 年 3 月 20 日的對話。
.
怎樣為之「同一部」電腦呢？
假設你的電腦換了幾個零件，那就牽涉到 identity（身份）的問題。你的電腦應該視為「新的電腦」，還是「升級了的舊電腦」？換句話說，改裝以後，你的電腦應該視作「另一部電腦」，還是「原本的電腦」呢？
.
（安：那要視乎 換了多少東西 和 換了什麼東西。例如，如果你的電腦只是換了 keyboard（鍵盤），那就應該算是「同一部」電腦。如果你的電腦連 CPU（central processing unit 中央處理器）都換掉，那就應該算是「另一部」電腦。）
.
那樣，如果我的電腦除了 CPU 以外，其他全部東西都換掉呢？你還叫它做「同一部」電腦嗎？
.
（安：那是灰色地帶，沒有一個絕對的標準答案。）
.
這就是重點是：那沒有一個，一定的標籤方法。那要視乎上文下理。相對於一個情境之下，哪一個標籤比較方便，就用那一個。
自我身份問題，有同樣的特性。如果我問「怎樣為之『同一個』自我」，雖然有一個，相對客觀的標籤方法，但都沒有一個，百份之一百，絕對客觀的標準答案。
— Me@2012.04.26
.
.
2012.04.26 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
Broken symmetry 4
The genius of Dropbox, for example, is that you don’t see or feel that it’s there.
— Six Things Google Drive Must Do To Compete With Dropbox, Apple’s iCloud, Microsoft Cloud, and Box
— Ben Kerschberg
— 4/18/2012 @ 9:37AM
— Forbes
2012.04.23 Monday ACHK
I’m doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won’t be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.
— Torvalds, Linus (1991-08-25). Post to comp.os.minix newsgroup. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.
— Notes: This was the launch of Linux.
2012.04.22 Sunday ACHK
The most powerful illusion, 3
The biggest problem we have as human beings is that we confuse our beliefs with reality.
— Alan Kay
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.
— Philip K. Dick
2012.04.22 Sunday ACHK
電腦輪迴觀 4
.
Many “impossible” things are possible if there are more than one person, such as time travel (to see your younger self), eternal life, and Wikipedia.
— Me@2012.04.07
.
.
2012.04.09 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
In theoretical physics and quantum field theory, a particle’s self-energy represents the contribution to the particle’s energy, or effective mass, due to interactions between the particle and the system it is part of.
— Wikipedia on Self-energy
2012.04.02 Monday ACHK
The mind which has become accustomed to the freedom and impartiality of philosophic contemplation will preserve something of the same freedom and impartiality in the world of action and emotion. It will view its purposes and desires as parts of the whole, with the absence of insistence that results from seeing them as infinitesimal fragments in a world of which all the rest is unaffected by any one man’s deeds. The impartiality which, in contemplation, is the unalloyed desire for truth, is the very same quality of mind which, in action, is justice, and in emotion is that universal love which can be given to all, and not only to those who are judged useful or admirable. Thus contemplation enlarges not only the objects of our thoughts, but also the objects of our actions and our affections: it makes us citizens of the universe, not only of one walled city at war with all the rest. In this citizenship of the universe consists man’s true freedom, and his liberation from the thraldom of narrow hopes and fears.
Thus, to sum up our discussion of the value of philosophy; Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind also is rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good.
— Bertrand Russell: The Value of Philosophy
— Chapter XV of The Problems of Philosophy
永恆感覺
無限旅程
— Me@2012-03-26 10:18:27 AM
2012.03.26 Monday ACHK
.
Creative people are often considered eccentric.
Everyone is creative and eccentric.
We are all unique.
But the vast majority are afraid to let it out.
It’s more accurate to describe so-called creative,
eccentric people as simply less inhibited.
– John T Reed
.
.
.
2010.02.27 Saturday ACHK
In fact, lots of astrophysicists think the anthropic issue, rather than signaling a problem with modern science, points toward a deeper understanding of the universe. Rees likes to use our solar system as an analogy. Says Rees: “If Earth were the only planet in the universe, you’d be astonished that we just happened to be exactly the right distance from the sun to be habitable.” That would be absurdly improbable, but it becomes much less so when you realize that the Milky Way almost certainly has millions of planets. With so many possibilities, it’s not surprising that at least one planet is friendly to life.
And so, he contends, it might be with the cosmos. What we think of as the “universe,” argues Rees, could well be just one of trillions of universes on an indescribably vaster stage called the multiverse. Each of those universes would have different laws and characteristics. Most of them are totally unlivable; like Earth, ours just happens to be one of the lucky ones.
— Cosmic Conundrum
— By Michael D. Lemonick; J. Madeleine Nash
— Time (magazine)
The correct version of anthropic principle should be called the anti-anthropic principle.
— Me@2011.11.10
2012.03.02 Friday ACHK
The vacuum structure of the theory, called the string theory landscape (or the anthropic portion of string theory vacua), is not well understood. String theory contains an infinite number of distinct meta-stable vacua, and perhaps 10^520 of these or more correspond to a universe roughly similar to ours — with four dimensions, a high planck scale, gauge groups, and chiral fermions. Each of these corresponds to a different possible universe, with a different collection of particles and forces.
Some physicists believe this is a good thing, because it may allow a natural anthropic explanation of the observed values of physical constants, in particular the small value of the cosmological constant. The argument is that most universes contain values for physical constants that do not lead to habitable universes (at least for humans), and so we happen to live in the most “friendly” universe. This principle is already employed to explain the existence of life on earth as the result of a life-friendly orbit around the medium-sized sun among an infinite number of possible orbits (as well as a relatively stable location in the galaxy).
— Wikipedia on String theory
The correct version of anthropic principle should be called anti-anthropic principle.
— Me@2011.11.10
2012.03.01 Thursday ACHK
種子論起點 12.3 | 兩次測驗 2
有心栽花花不香，無心插柳柳成蔭。當你「需要」一樣東西時，你就會失去它。
又例如，當你「需要」得到好成績時，你就會失去它：你的成績即使不太差，亦一定不會是最好。
如果你「需要」有好成績，才會感到有自信的話，每次在學業上遇到挫折時，你都會覺得那是對 自身人格 和 自我價值 的一個否定。那樣，溫習時，你會戰戰兢兢，自然不能得心應手；考試時，你會惶惶不安，自然不可揮灑自如。沒有豁達的心靈，就沒有靈活的頭腦。你一定不會是一個一流的學生。
正確的心態是，謀事在人，成事在天。你要知道，沒有人可以控制到，究竟自己拿不拿到好成績，因為影響成績的因素，實在有不少。你唯一可以做，唯一可以「控制」的，就是運用最好的策略，把試前十分有限的溫習時間，發揮至最大的功效，盡量提高「拿到好成績」的機會率。
在考試臨場作答時，你要使用同樣的心理結構。你可以控制的，是盡力作答，拿得一分得一分，從而提高「成功」的機會率。至於最終成不成功，或者最終拿到多少分，則完全不在你的控制範圍以內。
把手緊握 什麼都沒有 把手放開 你得到一切 — 臥虎藏龍
— Me@2012.02.28
2012.02.28 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
True love is inexhaustible: the more you give, the more you have.
— Antoine de Saint-Exupery
2012.02.22 Wednesday ACHK
水平 7.2 | Onion self 5.2 | Inner and outer, 5.2
.
One’s deepest self is the universe.
That’s why everyone’s deepest self is the same.
— Me@2012-01-26 4:30:09 PM
.
.
Everyone is not a part of the universe, but the whole of the universe.
Everyone is a layer of the universe.
— Me@2012-02-06 11:31:17 PM
.
A, B, C are three people.
They are just like three waves of the same underlying ocean (universe).
— Me@2012-02-08 12:55:31 PM
.
.
2012.02.13 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK
Physics Town 
You must be logged in to post a comment.