News:

Hand drawn by monkeys in sweat-shop conditions.

Main Menu

What the shit is all of this?

Started by Surround, August 19, 2011, 04:16:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

omnihil

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 01, 2014, 12:29:25 AM
Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 12:26:25 AM
Ok, well now that we're on that page for a moment, here is something else that is worth a though or two:

For quick briefing, in mathematics, there is a concept of asymptotes, in which a graphed equation will get closer and closer to a line without ever touching it.  I wrote down an idea where Chaos is only an asymptote, nothing is ever truly Random, it just appears random due to the complexity behind it's pattern.  In this writing, I mentioned that Chaos is the asymptote on an order with an INFINITE complexity. 

Absolute crap.  Below the atomic level, you get true random behavior.  That was the whole point of the Schroedinger's cat experiment.

Well, the point of this is, we could be calling it random because we can't perceive an infinite level of complexity, this is something only a god figure could perceive.  Calling something Eris to explain randomness, and anthropomorphizing it as a Goddess, is an example of putting a label on a consciousness that could perceive such an "Order" of infinite possibility.  Infinite possibility, I would dare say, does not contradict randomness.  But now we're just having a terminology debate.  Words are words


The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 12:39:46 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 01, 2014, 12:29:25 AM
Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 12:26:25 AM
Ok, well now that we're on that page for a moment, here is something else that is worth a though or two:

For quick briefing, in mathematics, there is a concept of asymptotes, in which a graphed equation will get closer and closer to a line without ever touching it.  I wrote down an idea where Chaos is only an asymptote, nothing is ever truly Random, it just appears random due to the complexity behind it's pattern.  In this writing, I mentioned that Chaos is the asymptote on an order with an INFINITE complexity. 

Absolute crap.  Below the atomic level, you get true random behavior.  That was the whole point of the Schroedinger's cat experiment.

Well, the point of this is, we could be calling it random because we can't perceive an infinite level of complexity, this is something only a god figure could perceive.  Calling something Eris to explain randomness, and anthropomorphizing it as a Goddess, is an example of putting a label on a consciousness that could perceive such an "Order" of infinite possibility.  Infinite possibility, I would dare say, does not contradict randomness.  But now we're just having a terminology debate.  Words are words

Semantics are shit.  Atomic decay is truly random, when an individual atom is being observed.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

omnihil

Indeed.  Much of that was absolute crap and shit.  I was attempting to explain what the shit all of this was, an idea anyways.  You don't have to recognize my idea, in all due fairness, my idea doesn't recognize your criticisms :)

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 12:50:43 AM
Indeed.  Much of that was absolute crap and shit.  I was attempting to explain what the shit all of this was, an idea anyways.  You don't have to recognize my idea, in all due fairness, my idea doesn't recognize your criticisms :)

I am a huge proponent of not allowing my ideas to be challenged.  It makes me feel like the primate I am.

:showus: <--- Me
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

omnihil

Yep.  Me too.

Below the subatomic level, there is nothing but randomness.  This is as readily apparent as the earth being flat by observers around the world!  Until of course, we see around the world.

LOGICAL CHECKMATES!

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "Alright!"
Person 1: "Hmmm..."

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "No!"

both scratch their heads...


The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 01:05:18 AM
Yep.  Me too.

Below the subatomic level, there is nothing but randomness.  This is as readily apparent as the earth being flat by observers around the world!  Until of course, we see around the world.

LOGICAL CHECKMATES!

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "Alright!"
Person 1: "Hmmm..."

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "No!"

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: " Think for yourself!"
Person 2: "Shut up."

Person 2 goes back to their e-sodoku.
Person 1 is butthurt because nobody's fighting the power with them.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

omnihil


The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 01:41:47 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 01, 2014, 01:07:12 AM

Person 1: " Think for yourself!"
Person 2: "Shut up."


This is good enough

It works surprisingly well.

"Fight the power!"
"Shut up."

"They're spraying chemtrails!"
"Shut up."

"FEMA CAMPS!"
"Shut up."

Etc.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 01, 2014, 01:07:12 AM
Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 01:05:18 AM
Yep.  Me too.

Below the subatomic level, there is nothing but randomness.  This is as readily apparent as the earth being flat by observers around the world!  Until of course, we see around the world.

LOGICAL CHECKMATES!

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "Alright!"
Person 1: "Hmmm..."

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "No!"

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: " Think for yourself!"
Person 2: "Shut up."

Person 2 goes back to their e-sodoku.
Person 1 is butthurt because nobody's fighting the power with them.

This reminds me of  my recent discovery that about the most offensive thing you can say to a person, be they religious, atheist, vegan, or whatever, is "I don't want to talk about your beliefs because I don't care". This is, for reasons I have not yet explored, much more offensive to most people than "I think you're wrong and I'm going to tell you why".
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

It also, coincidentally, completely sums up my reaction to everything said by any philosophy student ever.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


hooplala

Quote from: Nigel on April 01, 2014, 04:08:11 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 01, 2014, 01:07:12 AM
Quote from: omnihil on April 01, 2014, 01:05:18 AM
Yep.  Me too.

Below the subatomic level, there is nothing but randomness.  This is as readily apparent as the earth being flat by observers around the world!  Until of course, we see around the world.

LOGICAL CHECKMATES!

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "Alright!"
Person 1: "Hmmm..."

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "No!"

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: " Think for yourself!"
Person 2: "Shut up."

Person 2 goes back to their e-sodoku.
Person 1 is butthurt because nobody's fighting the power with them.

This reminds me of  my recent discovery that about the most offensive thing you can say to a person, be they religious, atheist, vegan, or whatever, is "I don't want to talk about your beliefs because I don't care". This is, for reasons I have not yet explored, much more offensive to most people than "I think you're wrong and I'm going to tell you why".

To consider someone wrong, you'd first have to consider them, at all.  It's almost like to refuse to even consider the position, you've denied their personhood - it would seem negation of the self is worse than possibly being wrong.
"Soon all of us will have special names" — Professor Brian O'Blivion

"Now's not the time to get silly, so wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns." — Bob Dylan?

"Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)"
— Walt Whitman

LMNO

To get back to the idea of underlying order at the subatomic level, let me reiterate what Roger is saying.

Our current understanding of quantum physics (and be assured that understanding is very solid, solid enough to make accurate predictions about future states of unobserved phenomena) revolves entirely -- ENTIRELY -- around probability theory.  Which means, when you get down to it, the universe is built on "maybe".  We have no idea how a particle will actually behave, but we have a pretty good idea what might happen.  That uncertainty seems to be hardwired into existence.

It's a pain in the ass, but it appears to be true.  And truth doesn't give a shit if it pisses you off.

hooplala

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on April 01, 2014, 12:18:10 PM
To get back to the idea of underlying order at the subatomic level, let me reiterate what Roger is saying.

Our current understanding of quantum physics (and be assured that understanding is very solid, solid enough to make accurate predictions about future states of unobserved phenomena) revolves entirely -- ENTIRELY -- around probability theory.  Which means, when you get down to it, the universe is built on "maybe".  We have no idea how a particle will actually behave, but we have a pretty good idea what might happen.  That uncertainty seems to be hardwired into existence.

It's a pain in the ass, but it appears to be true.  And truth doesn't give a shit if it pisses you off.

Surely the 'uncertainty' (or 'maybe') is in our perceptions and instruments, and not in the actual universe?  Or am I treading on barstool territory here?
"Soon all of us will have special names" — Professor Brian O'Blivion

"Now's not the time to get silly, so wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns." — Bob Dylan?

"Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)"
— Walt Whitman

LMNO

Sadly, no.  It's that damn Heisenberg.  The "instrument" we're using is pure math.  When that fails you, you know the universe is cheating.

Faust

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on April 01, 2014, 12:54:25 PM
Sadly, no.  It's that damn Heisenberg.  The "instrument" we're using is pure math.  When that fails you, you know the universe is cheating.

And sometimes, it just needs to be approached with different math. There were all those pesky infinities in the math around the atomic binding forces and then renormalisation comes along, and suddenly we have a really accurate experimentally verifiable model of the atom.
It's too small to work on gravity, no problem: try something else. Science is a work in progress.
Sleepless nights at the chateau