this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
31 points (89.7% liked)

Casual Conversation

3360 readers
352 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.


RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm imagining like a lot of different timelines. I'm jealous of the versions of me in the better timelines, and simultaneously afraid of those darker timelines, ones even darker than this timeline.

Do y'all think of the world as different "timelines"?

Perhaps I'm too obsessed with time-travel/multiverse-theory?

Btw I read Recursion lately (time trsvel story). And I watched Dark Matter TV Series (parallel universe story). Both stories by the same author.

Every time these concepts appear in the media, my "obsession" just goes even further.

I don't like this current "depression" timeline. Very shitty.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hisao@ani.social 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Isn't it time travel that breaks causality? How can even physical existence of parallel timelines break it?

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Via the concept of Laplace's Demon, according to those physicists.

[–] moonlight@fedia.io 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Laplace's Demon is just a thought experiment, and has nothing to do with alternate timelines.

Anyway, multiple timelines are definitely not incompatible with our understanding of physics and causality. Look into the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. (in my opinion, the most reasonable explanation of quantum physics)

[–] pcalau12i@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Why is adding an additional unprovable postulate to quantum mechanics (the universal wave function) and believing we live in an invisible infinite-dimensional infinitely branching multiverse more reasonable than just accepting that quantum mechanics is a time-symmetric theory?

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago

I mean referring to the parallel universe concept. Unless everyone here believes in free will, the thinking goes universes that start out the same are going to play out the same, requiring any differences to be caused by external interference.