Poster: Hank @ Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:33 am
By Hannibal Goodfellow 03-15-2008
See parts 1 and 2 below
Q : You didn't answer my question from before. What is the point of telling people these things if they can't change them? Didn't you say that your book "An Acceptable Future" is meant to provoke thought about how peoples' actions affect the future?
A : First of all, you asked me here to talk about music and then started asking all these other questions, so, you know, that's not what I came here to do. I came here to spread psychedelic music and ideas. You can't change the future, as you say -- the future has already happened. Time is static.
Q : So why would anyone in the future buy your book?
A : Because nobody where-slash-when I come from has knowledge of their future, including me. The static nature of time doesn't negate causality. Since we don't know how things worked out in our future, there's the potential that changing the way we do things can result in a future reality that is better than if we didn't change things.
Q : So there aren't any people like you in your reality, whose consciousnesses are quantum-entanged with people from your future, or whatever?
A : Not that I know of. The nature of my condition, that is, having my entire consciousness entangled with another, is so staggeringly improbable that there may not be a similar case at any place or time. Consider the commonly-stated fact of quantum behavior that for a can of soup -- all its particles simultaneously -- to spontaneously move an inch in any direction as a result of quantum fluctuation is of such remote probability that it may never happen in the history of the universe. There are more quanta in a sentient mind than in a simple object like a soup can, and for every particle-wave in it to be entangled with another that is also configured in a mind, and also symmetrically configured with respect to the near-innumerable other quanta in the other mind, is very close to an impossibility.
Q : So you're a freak.
A : I'm a freak.
Q : I'm confused also about your music and your claim that it is from the future. You said before that physical travel through time is not known to you and might not be possible. How then do you bring your music to us fro the 'future?'
A : Now, that's a good question. The answer is that I'm fudging my claims a little bit. The music is composed in your future, that is, I compose it in response to the reality I experience in what you call the future. Of couse, physically speaking, since I'm the same in the 'future' and here, I also compose it in this reality. Now, it's not possible to transmit information across 'time,' so the recordings that you hear are not made in your future. They're created here, using compositions created in the future.
Q : But you said that information can't be transmitted across time.
A : No information is being transmitted. In entangled states, simultaneity is complete -- what I think in the 'future' is thought simultaneously by me 'here,' and vice versa. No transmission occurs.
Q : Sounds fishy.
A : Read up on it in any of your popular science books or watch PBS for a while and you'll probably get it. The fact that this music is from the 'future' isn't even really the main point.
Q : It sounds to me like you're just creating and recording music like anybody else.
A : If you want to see it that way, great, as long as you listen to the music. The fact is that the information that spurs these compositions is experienced in your future. But that's not really important, as long as you can experience the psychedelia that I intend.
Q : So you record these things using our technology.
A : Here, yes. These compositions get recorded both here and in your future. But as I said, the guitars are very similar, and overall, I'm able to get the final output to sound very alike in both realities.
Q : Doesn't your boss at Princeton get mad when you're spacing out, messing with your recordings 'here?'
A : My boss spends most of his time watching his own back -- academics are ruthless.
Q : Don't you think it's deceptive to market this music as being from the future if it's recorded here?
A : First off, this stuff is distributed for free, so people can take it or leave it. Second, do you consider it deceptive for people to record music composed in the Baroque period and market it as "18th century music?"
Q : OK, I get the point. The music is pretty cool, either way.
A : Thanks.
Q : What do people dress like in the future?
A : Not like you, pal, that's for sure.