Are we here to solve a wicked problem?
Living in a simulation wouldn’t get rid of the need to solve climate change 鈥� in fact, it may amplify it. If reality is a simulation, then it must have been created for some purpose. Since the most common use of simulations is research, it is possible we have been created to answer some question (Letters, 7 September).
I think the most plausible reason to simulate a universe is to find the answer to some wicked, existential problem that the simulators have been unable to solve in any other way. If so, then our duty to our creators, and to each other, is to overcome the challenges our society faces to provide the best answers to whatever the unknown question behind our existence may be.
Call off Artemis and give cash to Chanda instead
Sending humans into space is a total waste of time and money. What should we do with the funds instead? Give some to columnist Chanda Prescod-Weinstein to keep the Chandra X-ray Observatory running. The rest can be spent on many more scientific instruments that need funding (24 August, p 20).
Using maths to drive even more efficiently
Research shows we shouldn’t slam on the brakes at a red light, but rather start slowing down before, in order to cut emissions. But it depends. When I come around a corner and see a red light ahead of me and no cars between me and it, I don’t brake 鈥� I push the clutch and glide, hoping the light will turn before I get there. If it doesn’t, then of course I have to brake. That minimises the expected consumption of fuel (7 September, p 17).
If there are other cars waiting at the red light, then I slow down in such a way that when the light turns green I can continue driving without having to brake anymore. (I have a bag of such tricks I have worked out mathematically, and use!) The same things can be done in an electric vehicle as in an internal combustion vehicle. We want to save energy, whether from fossil fuel or from renewable resources!
What makes us human? Our self-delusions
The more I learn in 快猫短视频 about the physical, mental and emotional abilities of animals, the more it strikes me that the only thing that makes us distinctly human is our almost limitless capacity for self-delusion (3 August, p 32)
The blob can play, but can it actually think?
You report that a blob of jelly can play the game Pong thanks to a basic memory. To me, this implies some form of synthetic cognition, especially since the polymer used utilises ion transport, the same “technology” employed throughout the human body, including the brain (31 August, p 13).
This and similar experiments raise the question: “What constitutes cognition?” The jelly achieved the objective of showing basic memory. However, human cognition was involved in both the inputs to the blob and subsequent processing of the output, which was crucial to positioning the pong paddle.
If a human could only fly a plane based on an instructor’s continual prompts, I would say they haven’t demonstrated the ability to fly the plane. Clearly, some human involvement will be needed in setting up such experiments, but at what point does that detract from a claim of material cognition?
Taking the scenic route: IKEA got there first
A reader’s suggestion of encouraging healthy mobility in an office by designing a necessity for longer walks seems innovative, but surely stores such as IKEA have been doing this for decades. However, the health gain of being shunted past acres of bedding and lighting to get to a dinner plate might be negated by the stress and irritation due to following the cynical, maze-like layout (Letters, 17 August).
Unimpressed by the new wave of AI chatbots
I applaud Michael Crowe for calling out “so-called AI”. Maybe I am not alone after all in finding the current crop of AI assistants like a pack of over-eager office boys getting under my feet and clamouring to tie my shoelaces (Letters, 31 August).
Ironically, I find myself torn between the temptation to shout at them to “go and find something useful to do!” and guiltily feeling I have some responsibility for helping them to grow up. Given that all our interactions are being closely scrutinised by their AI masters for their own purposes, would they grow up more quickly if I did shout at them?
Worrying unknowns in mental health crisis
Many possible factors are outlined that might lie behind a seemingly unstoppable rise in poor mental health among young people. Issues around climate change, lockdowns, smartphones and social media are all suggested as possible causes. Greater awareness and openness around mental health could also contribute (24 August, p 14).
Worryingly, there is no real proof that any of these are causal. And if none of these account for the rise, then what does?
Realism seems unlikely in quantum mechanics
Evidence seems to contradict the proposed realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics (7 September, p 32).
That evidence is Nobel laureate Anton Zeilinger’s “entanglement transfer” experiment. It involves two entangled pairs of photons. The polarisation of one of each pair is separately measured. Only much later, after either passing through a device that entangles the two remaining photons, or not, are the other photons measured. The meaning of the correlations of the first photon measurements alters depending on the presence or absence of the entangling device prior to the later measurements.
The results imply that all talk of pre-existing reality of the photon polarisations before all irreversible measurements are completed is meaningless, a fatal blow to the realistic interpretation reported.