this is vaguely related to the string theory related post from a day or two ago, it’s all bazinga science folks TL;DW string theory is a big thing because people that read pop science really liked it and it took a long time for physicists to come out in force and say “this is untestable garbage”
Justin Roiland was always a piece of shit but his nonsensical internal calculation of “if multiverse, no one anywhere matters so be a murderous asshole” was a staggeringly bad cognitohazard that may very well have contributed to the recent “people I don’t like are NPCs” cryptofascist :brainworms:
Roiland is a piece of shit, but the show is very explicit about how letting everyone you care about die, and then jumping into an alternate universe where you didn’t do this is traumatizing.
The show doesn’t go more than an episode without reminding the viewer that everybody including Rick hates Rick for behaving like a detached asshole.
but the show is very explicit about how letting everyone you care about die, and then jumping into an alternate universe where you didn’t do this is traumatizing.
I’ve heard this before. Does the same “totally don’t admire this nihilistic murderous asshole, pinkie promise you won’t” message that missed so much of its loud fandom for years also apply to Roiland’s “what if Back to the Future, but Doc Brown is a pedophile lololololol” pilot for the show, or for that matter this “just kidding, just want to see how people react, this is only ironic fantasies about brutally hurting children on multiple levels” cartoon short here?
(CW: “ironic” physical and sexual abuse of children, torture, snuff)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZQbX7_Eeg4
The show doesn’t go more than an episode without reminding the viewer that everybody including Rick hates Rick for behaving like a detached asshole.
It still gives the perpetrator most of the screen time, lines, plot armor, and basic invincibility. It’s hard to really punish someone who by necessity must keep returning because the show runners say so to do more wacky edgelord hijinks next time around.
Also, the premise of the show requires that that murderous nihilism be technically justified by the plot. That’s bullshit. There’s no reason for a multiverse’s existence to necessiate the conclusion of “no one matters, exploiting and murdering people is cool and good now” outside of Roiland’s own beliefs.
Roiland is a piece of shit, but the show is very explicit about how letting everyone you care about die, and then jumping into an alternate universe where you didn’t do this is traumatizing.
Is it implied that that’s the only reason why you shouldn’t do it?
Or how about Dan Harman, the other co-creator of “Rick and Morty,” who filmed himself
CW: yuk
spoiler
r*ping a babydoll.
I didn’t even know that yet but at this point pretty much anything new that I hear about the owners of the Rick and Morty franchise is sure to be full of “ironic” :awooga: :libertarian-alert: :hypersus: cravings from one of two deeply privileged worker-hating rich white assholes.
how is a multiverse any less testable than a single universe though? It seems to me there are “at least one” universes and narrowing down the “at least” part seems difficult
I’m no physicist, but I assume if a multiverse was easily testable within the confines of this universe, it wouldn’t really count as a separate universe. :edgeworth-shrug:
Not really, no. It’s probably not right to call the Everett interpretation the most popular account of anything; it’s got a niche, but it’s not super popular with most physicists. Even setting that aside, calling the Everett interpretation “many worlds” or “multiverse” is kind of a misnomer. The wave function has a branching structure with respect to certain events, but even on distinct “branches,” you’re not really looking at separate worlds in the standard sense. For one thing, branches can recohere on the Everett interpretation–it just requires a very particular series of events.
This is always something that’s bugged me about the popular depiction of “multiverse” stuff as well (think Sliders, Rick & Morty, etc.): if you can travel between “universes,” in what sense are the multiple universes instead of just one universe with a very strange geometry? It seems like if causation and human beings can move between two points, then those two points are by definition in the same universe.
The whole pop-culture “multiverse” trope is also not taking into account the fact that only quantum particles are able to exist in an uncollapsed state. The thing that collapses a wave function isn’t magical observation, it’s a concentration of quantum particles interacting with each other.
A human sized collection of particles is incredibly stable because of the “inertia” of those particles interacting with one another. The Schrodinger paradox wasn’t meant to be some big revelation about the nature of quantum systems, but a joke about how we don’t really understand yet what it is that causes the collapse of the wave function and viewing quantum events outside the context of the local systems they occur in is bound to lead to paradoxical conclusions.
But we get multiverse pop-culture stuff because it’s an easy cop out for writers.
