Sean Carroll

free will.

And I've told them that.

I told Sam Harris that.

I told Robert Sapolsky that.

It just has no impact.

I really don't get it.

You know, there are better arguments, and some people do have better arguments, but I mean at the, you know, neither Sam nor Sapolsky are professional philosophers.

They

just think that they're finished with this question when they say that things are deterministic.

And I think that the real experts, I don't know Paraboom, but I'm sure that he's a little bit more subtle about it and recognizes that just shouting about determinism is not actually a counter argument to compatibilism.

Adam Mills says, I have a crackpot question about UFOs.

Consider the claim of gravitational propulsion put forth in recent years by the UFO community, essentially a non-reactive system that instead manipulates the medium of space time for propulsion, fine.

What has me thinking is this,

Considering that the Earth is subjected to a myriad of gravitational influences, including the Sun, the galaxy, the Great Attractor, etc., wouldn't this give it a sort of complex trajectory through spacetime?

And if so, in order for an object that is existing outside of the influence of gravity, like a UFO, to follow an object that is being influenced by gravity, like the Earth, wouldn't it also need to know...

that very specific trajectory through space-time in some way.

If that all tracks, my real question is this.

How would you speculate that this could be accomplished?

What mechanism or concept do we know of that can bridge between two objects that are theoretically separated by gravity like this?

Look, the only honest answer here is that all of this is just nonsense.