Okay so, fuck knows about the source but it appears legit on the surface (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp4NkItgf0E)
Reality has embedded checksums? Makes sense, if you treat the whole thing as information, I guess. It would degrade if there wasn't built in error-checking. Just thought I'd throw this out in case it's been discredited or something?
I remember that from a Neil deGrasse Tyson bender I went on a while back. It's from the 2011 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate (http://youtu.be/lYeN66CSQhg).
I'm interested in what comes out of his observations.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 26, 2014, 12:52:19 PM
Okay so, fuck knows about the source but it appears legit on the surface (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp4NkItgf0E)
Reality has embedded checksums? Makes sense, if you treat the whole thing as information, I guess. It would degrade if there wasn't built in error-checking. Just thought I'd throw this out in case it's been discredited or something?
Well, cell replication has built-inn checkpoints. Why not? Reality consists of persisting patterns, which means that what we find on a larger scale is often found also on a smaller scale, and vice-versa.
As far as I know, the math sort of works for String Theory, but the entire thing is untestable, so no one can really verify it.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 27, 2014, 03:02:35 PM
As far as I know, the math sort of works for String Theory, but the entire thing is untestable, so no one can really verify it.
If the math says it works, it fucking works. :argh!:
"sort of" works.
Kind of like the way "multiple universes" sort of works.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 27, 2014, 03:31:36 PM
"sort of" works.
Kind of like the way "multiple universes" sort of works.
Math doesn't sort of. It may work in a bizarre fashion, it may give you two results (one positive, one negative), but it works. And it's never wrong. If the math says it is so, then it is so.
Ah, but what if you make unprovable assumptions? Or if you say, "because Dark Energy", like that actually means something?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 27, 2014, 04:08:44 PM
Ah, but what if you make unprovable assumptions? Or if you say, "because Dark Energy", like that actually means something?
If you set up the question wrong, then the answer will be wrong, of course. Garbage in, garbage out. Math is like the old testament...Lots of rules, and
no forgiveness.
But multiple worlds and string theory can't both be right.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 27, 2014, 04:32:21 PM
But multiple worlds and string theory can't both be right.
I don't know enough about string theory, to be perfectly honest, to agree or disagree with that statement.
Hold up-- I appear to be talking out of my ass. Many Worlds can happen within String Theory, because it mainly deals with decoherence, and ST goes beneath that.
ST solves for gravity, which is cool, but it does seem the main objection is you can't make predictions with it; that is to say, it's pretty, but there's no way to be sure of it. Like the Higgs Boson, there was strong theoretical evidence for decades, but the case wasn't closed until last year.