News:

You know what I always say? "Always kill the mouthy one", that's what I always say.

Main Menu

About Chaos, and the illusions of Order and Disorder

Started by Cainad (dec.), January 10, 2010, 09:40:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

LMNO

That's where I think I'm heading.

That is to say, for me, in a Discordian context, I cannot use the Mathematical definition of Chaos, because, when speaking of Discordia, I am using Chaos is a philisophical, almost metaphorical sense.  Or perhaps in a pragmatic sense.  Sure, a complex system might have an underlying order, but I'll never see it in my day-to-day life.  So I call it "Chaos", because my perceptions cannot call it otherwise.

LMNO


Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

Quote from: LMNO on January 13, 2010, 05:06:47 PM
In other news, I sure do use a lot of commas.

Well, as long as they aren't those smartie pants edumachated asshole commas from Oxford....
- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

NotPublished

#63
Quote from: GA on January 13, 2010, 04:36:32 PM
An awful lot of creation narratives..

I just wanted to throw something out here - What if the world/universe was NEVER created but it always existed?

But we only say it was created because this is what we are comfortable with. I can understand the planet being created (I guess in my original statement, it was a bit self-conceited to put the world/universe together), but what about the universe itself? What if it's always been there - many would find that a contradiction to existance itself since everything would have to of been created. But that is a dualistic principle - if its created, its destroyed. The universe was neither created nor destroyed - it is just there.

What if existance itself was never created? Perhaps the nature of the universe isn't dualistic but just a single thing.

Though yeah, just a thought I wanted to throw out there.
In Soviet Russia, sins died for Jesus.


Salty

Now, I can't be sure about this, but I think the expanding nature of the universe might have something to say about that.

Unless something's changed since I last lernt teh science.
The world is a car and you're the crash test dummy.

NotPublished

#66
It is just a thought I was toying around with - I am definantly not a student of science  :lulz: (I barely paid attention while in School)

But really, how do you even prove the universe is expanding?
In Soviet Russia, sins died for Jesus.

Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

There is at least one model that I read about, which attempted to explain the Universe in a method which accounts for expansion and redshift etc but doesn't necessarily require a beginning or end.

http://www.specularium.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=50

It may be crap... but it may also indicate that there could be an explanation that doesn't require a beginning or end, necessarily. Basically it models the universe as a six dimensional Hypercube (3 of Space and 3 of Time) as some kind of Ouroboros.
- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

NotPublished

That looks like a big read, I'll do that a bit later.
In Soviet Russia, sins died for Jesus.

Jasper

The scientific data for there being a 'beginning of time' circa the big bang is fairly conclusive.  Every theory that competes with the big bang posits things that are unsupported.  I have a book that does a blurb on all this, I could dig it up given half an hour of box re-stacking.

In my search for relevant information, I came across this:

http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~mab/education/astro103/lectures/l26/l26.html

It provides some very basic quick notes on the big bang, and why it is safe to assume the big bang.

Note: The big bang signifies the beginning of spacetime, and it is impossible for anything to have happened 'before' then, because there was no 'before'.

BabylonHoruv

I've always been a fan of the brane theory.  Basically the idea is that our universe is the result of the collision of two different membranes. (sounds a fair amount like the concept behind the Invisibles, but I got it from Discover Magazine, http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/Discover0204.pdf is the story)  Fits in with the concept of the universe arising from sex between two deities as well, so it meshes with my pagan upbringing comfortably.
You're a special case, Babylon.  You are offensive even when you don't post.

Merely by being alive, you make everyone just a little more miserable

-Dok Howl

Jasper

I'm a fan of theories that fit the existing observations and make accurate predictions.

Theoretical physics has a lot of amusingly wild speculations.  Believe them at your own risk. :)

Lord Quantum

#72
I like LMNO's definition

Quote from: LMNO on January 04, 2010, 02:57:55 PM
the Universe is Chaos, which is perceived as an infinite amount of random events.

Chaos = Infinite Randomness. The problem of course is that Infinite Randomness isn't useful (like mud) so people create patterns to make more sense of the mud. They shape it bake it and eventually build bricks out of it. Then the bricks become a house and they live in the house. And all the while they tell themselves that they're in a house (which they are) but really it's just a whole lot of mud.

It's kinda like how Christians read the Bible. They quote the verses that fit with their own view (order) and ignore the ones that contradict their view (disorder).
So Order is like proof-texting the Universe. Stop proof-texting the Universe!  :argh!:
Quote from: Cain on March 28, 2010, 09:44:45 PM
Fuck it.  I'm going to get ordained as a Catholic priest and start robbing banks and mugging people.  I mean, apparently, you can be excused any crime if you're in with the Big V.

Quote from: Requia ☣ on September 28, 2008, 02:09:45 AM

Lets try it on an even simpler level:

1) There is a minimum energy/mass things can have, everything can be measured in a multiple of this minimum.

2) Objects at this size, or close to it, don't have an exact position or velocity, so they look like waves in most experiments.

3) If you try to measure the location, they act more like particles, just to fuck with you, but the velocity gets more uncertain, also just to fuck with you.

Conclusion: God hates physicists.

GASMs - PosterGASM (Calvinball edition), AbbyGASM

Pirate Pass Off Scorecard (5)

Iason Ouabache

Quote from: Summa DiscordiaChaos is the oldest God. It was the reason that the earliest humans decided to focus their attentions on the spiritual beyond. Chaos is, almost by definition, something that is not controlled, and therefore seems inseparably related to the divine. Our truest sense of chaos originates from the awareness that we are faced with a universe of unimaginable complexity.

At the same time, there is a more practical side to this drive toward worship. This pull to the divine was always followed by the need to propitiate these unimaginably powerful forces, since so little in this world seemed under our control. Cave paintings weren't just decorative - they were part of ritualistic performances to ensure a successful hunt. The fertility icons found in Catal Huyuk were trusted to ensure a plentiful
harvest and large family.

We've come a long way since those days. We're better than that now. We're smarter, for one, and we're stronger. We have technology that can predict and control a good part of that mysterious void that was nature. The products of our society are not just works of art that hope at influence over nature, but massive dams, roads, buildings, ships, aircraft - acts of technical dominance over nature. We're stronger now. We're
powerful. We're safer.

Except we're still afraid of chaos.

Sometimes we can cover it up by wrapping ourselves in order, in the understood. Throw up the walls of technology, of medicine, of science, of logic. We can drop a veil around ourselves, saying, "I understand everything. That which I don't understand is therefore nothing," and doing this rids us of the larger, more troubling part of the world. A smacks into B and causes C, and with a little more study and a little hard work we can cause C on command.

But Discordians have this all figured out. We worship Eris, the Goddess of Chaos. And she's let us in on the Big Secret. You see, the Fallacy of Chaos is that it exists at all. Chaos is an order that we are not smart enough, not willing enough, or just in the wrong place to see. Order is simply a chunk of chaos that one of us has haphazardly slathered with "meaning". Everything is everything. Bundi ti ubundi.

You know you're close to understanding Chaos when you either see it everywhere or nowhere, but you're not sure which.

:fnord:
You cannot fathom the immensity of the fuck i do not give.
    \
┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘

Xila31

Quote from: NotPublished on January 13, 2010, 09:31:15 PM
Quote from: GA on January 13, 2010, 04:36:32 PM
An awful lot of creation narratives..

I just wanted to throw something out here - What if the world/universe was NEVER created but it always existed?

But we only say it was created because this is what we are comfortable with. I can understand the planet being created (I guess in my original statement, it was a bit self-conceited to put the world/universe together), but what about the universe itself? What if it's always been there - many would find that a contradiction to existance itself since everything would have to of been created. But that is a dualistic principle - if its created, its destroyed. The universe was neither created nor destroyed - it is just there.

What if existance itself was never created? Perhaps the nature of the universe isn't dualistic but just a single thing.

Though yeah, just a thought I wanted to throw out there.

Hi, I'm going to jump in because this jumped out at me. It makes sense. What is the universe physically speaking? it is a big empty space dotted by a random collection of stars, planets, and other random "space junk" like comets. But when you get right down to it, the universe is a lot of empty space between these things. It isn't like driving from Colorado to Kansas. Sure, there's a lot of open space in between but there is a lot of things there. Animals. Plants. Rocks... and even weather. There is no weather in space. There are no plants or animals (although a rock floats by, perhaps.) So, when you think about it, the "universe" being created is sort of odd. How do create a void of nothing? But the individual objects in it needed to be created. And so the empty space was always there. It is the rest of it that had to come from somewhere.

Just a thought.