VisorCentral.com - Inane ramblings

Pages (73): « First ... « 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 » ... Last »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Off Topic (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6)
-- Inane ramblings (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=16736)

Posted by septimus on 07-30-2001 08:49 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson
MPD?

Multiple Personality Disorder

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by dick-richardson on 07-30-2001 08:57 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dietrichbohn
First of all, can you exactly measure any system quantitatively, or simply apply the most convenient abstraction (number) to your best guess? How many particles are in an apple? An infinite number?

No. A relatively large finite number.

quote:
The only reason we think that the universe has not existed infinitely is the big bang. This theory does not claim that the universe will not continue to exist infinitely (in fact, last I heard scientists are leaning towards eternal expansion). Even if it did, relativity says that the universe is bent about another dimension much like a ball, that if you travel in a straight line you come to the other side, so there are infinte measure of the universe...

Measure, yes. Area, no. I will cede that time is a different beast and infinity may exist with regard to time (as time is merely the perception of a perpetual "now").

quote:
Ok, now, there are two reasons why I think it's at least plausible that the universe has existed infinitely:

1) According to Big Bang Theory, we don't know what happened before the singularity, and cannot know. It may be that the singularity has existed for all eternity.

Off topic, but I read an interesting theory somewhere that the 'big bang' may have been merely the collision between dimensions. I'll have to hunt that down.

quote:
2) There is an alternate theory of the universe put forth by Stephen Hawking called The no-boundary universe, in which time is non-linear and could be argued to be infinite. That PBS site I just linked is really cool, btw.

I'll come back to this after I read the link.

quote:
But I think that no matter what, I'm not going to convince D-R that infinity doesn't need to be classified as a non-number or that it can be implemented in our universe in the same way as other irrational numbers.

I'll cede infinity can exist in mathematics. I'll cede that it can exist in time (rather - 'time,' per se, doesn't necessarily exist). I will never cede that infinity can exist in a quantitive system.

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

Posted by Soul Raven on 07-30-2001 09:03 PM:

OK, here is where we travel to the theoreticaly limits of my brain...

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
If Einstein is travelling away from the clock at the speed of light, then the light from the watch would have to go faster than the speed of light to reach Einstein, no matter how close it was to his eyes (even if there was a cable planted into his optic nerve).

From what I understand, the speed of light is relative to the observer, so that if Einstein was headed away from that clock at 0.99c, the light reflected from the clock would still hit his retina (or appear to hit it) at 293,000kps. That was the tricky thing, relativity. Was Einstein moving away from the clock, or was the clock moving away from him? Either way, light travels at the same speed. Granted, the wavelength might appear different, and the clock would take on a reddish hue as it sped away (er, remained while Einstein sped away, whatever), but the light itself still traveled at the same rate.

__________________
Soul Raven - "Sm� hjerne, stor gl�de"
Wherever you go, there you are.

Posted by septimus on 07-30-2001 09:08 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson
Measure, yes. Area, no. I will cede that time is a different beast and infinity may exist with regard to time (as time is merely the perception of a perpetual "now").

Wait a minute...

quote:
I'll cede infinity can exist in mathematics. I'll cede that it can exist in time (rather - 'time,' per se, doesn't necessarily exist). I will never cede that infinity can exist in a quantitive system.

I think you mean "quantifiable," not "quantitative" (i.e. consisting of numbers, i.e. mathematics)

If you cede that infinity "exists" in regard to time, then you've just ceded that it can exist in a quantatifiable system. Unless you're arguing that time is not quantatifiable. I think that I'm confused here...

Finally, even if infinity doesn't exist in a quantifiable system, neither does any other number, just implementations of numbers, as you've also ceded...

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by dick-richardson on 07-30-2001 09:25 PM:

Ok. I'm wrong. Here's why.

Everything get's thrown out the window with my cession to Toby that time doesn't exist (as we've just seen). This line of "now" doesn't necessarily move forward. A universe that is infinite would encompass ours - IOW, we'd be living in that infinite universe. That perpetual 'now' is infinitely small, which means there is an infinite number (I cede, mr bohn) of options outside of what we experience. An infinite number of apples not only can exist, but does. Toby, will you cede that an infinite number of apples doesn't exist 'now'?

This doesn't answer my question w/regard to einstein being followed by a moon shadow. As for God having MPD (hilarious, btw), I would say that they are different views of the same face.

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

Posted by septimus on 07-30-2001 09:54 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson
Ok. I'm wrong. Here's why.

Everything get's thrown out the window with my cession to Toby that time doesn't exist (as we've just seen). This line of "now" doesn't necessarily move forward. A universe that is infinite would encompass ours - IOW, we'd be living in that infinite universe. That perpetual 'now' is infinitely small, which means there is an infinite number (I cede, mr bohn) of options outside of what we experience. An infinite number of apples not only can exist, but does. Toby, will you cede that an infinite number of apples doesn't exist 'now'?

Whoa, the ground is getting cold, something must be freezing over...

Ok, let me understand what you're saying, because I claimed that time was an implementation of infinity w/out really understanding what I was saying... (I know, I know, goddamn sophistry!).

...processing...

...processing...

Ok... nope...

...blue screen of death...

Ack. I've deleted about 5 attempts at putting it in my own words. Suffice to say that while I'm not sure that time is an implementation of infinity in our universe, I'm starting to worry about any number's ability to be implemented in our universe (i.e. what is an apple, where does the apple end and the air begin, how can there just be one apple there when the apple is not the same instant to instant, etc etc,)... So it may be that we both think the same thing (infinity can be classified in the same group as the other numbers) for different reasons (i.e. you b/c it can be implemented, me b/c it can't!)

Ack! Ack! Ack!!

"So far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain. And so far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."--Albert Einstein

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by septimus on 07-30-2001 09:58 PM:

Get This!

I knew that einstein quote existed, so I searched for it and found it, but Check out where I found it!. It's a paper about fuzzy logic. I haven't read it yet, but the first paragraph is about...

...Whether you can quantify the existence of an apple!!! The source looks unreliable, but the paper is interesting....

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by dick-richardson on 07-31-2001 02:51 AM:

I can't believe I had fun being wrong! The subject title turned out to almost prophetic. I don't suppose your religion needs a prophet, Toby?

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

Posted by JHromadka on 07-31-2001 03:38 AM:

Now we're getting into that nasty Heisenberg (sic?) uncertainty principle, where you cannot know the exact quantum location of an object at any moment in time. Good thing those ST transporters had Heisenberg compensators.

Why is there a discussion on whether infinity exists or not? Wasn't one of the parts of the Relativity Theory that as an object approaches c, its mass becomes infinite?

__________________
James Hromadka
Old Friend

Posted by BobbyMike on 07-31-2001 02:29 PM:

Sorry about the delay in replying, having trouble logging in the few times I've been free.
K.C., no sweat. I wasn't actually referring to you. Your contribution was very helpful in helping me clarify what I was trying to say.

About the marriage thing, I don't know whether there will be any difference in the two because in my opinion it doesn't matter where you were coming from before the marriage, it's all up to the partners attitudes after the marriage. In other words, I believe a couple can will to have a good marriage, just as it's possible for a couple to let a marriage fall apart through inattention. I think that would skew the results.

I'm late to the party on the time/infinity discussion.

I've always thought of time as a phenomena that was measurable by certain methods (and normally those measurements can be repeated exactly), but that was also able to be affected by other phenomena (gravity for one).
Our perception of time, however, is more fluid. It appears to slow and speed up depending on our mental and emotional states.

Must empty out attic now!
Michael

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."

Posted by septimus on 07-31-2001 02:39 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by JHromadka
Now we're getting into that nasty Heisenberg (sic?) uncertainty principle, where you cannot know the exact quantum location of an object at any moment in time. Good thing those ST transporters had Heisenberg compensators.

Oh boy.. we shouldn't go there...

quote:
Why is there a discussion on whether infinity exists or not? Wasn't one of the parts of the Relativity Theory that as an object approaches c, its mass becomes infinite?

Sigh. You know, don't you, and you're just mocking us. The whole thing started when D-R made a metaphor for the shrinking size of Religion, we hashed out an equation, joked that all we do is argue semantics, and D-R throws this out:

quote:
Although, I'd point out that given a different set of coefficients, n^x may not necessarily meet zero at infinity (which doesn't exist given the linear nature of time at any rate).

And, well, we were off to the races.

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by septimus on 07-31-2001 02:40 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by BobbyMike
(and normally those measurements can be repeated exactly)

Erp. How exactly does one repeat exactly a measurement of time?

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by septimus on 07-31-2001 02:43 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson
I can't believe I had fun being wrong! The subject title turned out to almost prophetic. I don't suppose your religion needs a prophet, Toby?

...First thing I do is post 3 in a row in the off topic forum... Maybe I'm bad for VC...

It's been fun for me, too, also because you've changed my mind about infinity... we're now on opposite sides of the fence. I still think that infinity is classed with the other numbers, but I now think the whole class can't be implemented exactly in reality! (yep, heisenberg, the jerk.)

BTW: This is awesome!, I couldn't get this kind of discussion going in most of my uppe-level metaphysics classes, yet here we go on a visor discussion board!

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by dick-richardson on 07-31-2001 02:58 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dietrichbohn
Sigh. You know, don't you, and you're just mocking us.[/B]

lol!

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

Posted by Toby on 07-31-2001 04:17 PM:

Too much to address it all, but...

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson
[...] Toby, will you cede that an infinite number of apples doesn't exist 'now'?

For that I'd have to cede that there is a 'now'. There is no spoon.

quote:
This doesn't answer my question w/regard to einstein being followed by a moon shadow.

How do you expect me to respond to anything now that I've got a Yusef Islam song stuck in my head?

Posted by Toby on 07-31-2001 04:21 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson
I can't believe I had fun being wrong!

If one is never wrong, one never truly learns anything.

quote:
The subject title turned out to almost prophetic. I don't suppose your religion needs a prophet, Toby?

Yeah, but the pay sucks.

Posted by dick-richardson on 07-31-2001 04:40 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
For that I'd have to cede that there is a 'now'. There is no spoon.

Fine. Be that way.

quote:
How do you expect me to respond to anything now that I've got a Yusef Islam song stuck in my head?

There is no Yusef Islam.

quote:
Yeah, but the pay sucks.

But imagine the spiritual satisfaction and eternal reward!

__________________
-Joshua
Abortion: Darwinism at its finest.

Posted by septimus on 07-31-2001 04:42 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dick-richardson

Fine. Be that way.

There is no Yusef Islam.

All your Yusef Islam are belong to Spoon?

...Now we're getting back to the original subject...

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by K. Cannon on 07-31-2001 07:21 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by dietrichbohn
...Now we're getting back to the original subject...

Nope, this is the original subject...

"My dad was supposed to come some time last week, but didn't show up. He says he tried to call but couldn't get around the unlisted filter I have for my phone line, even though it gives instructions when you call. I didn't find out until I called him at his own house 4 days after he was supposed to be here. So, I guess I won't call him anymore, and we'll see how long it is before we talk again. My mom and wife were much more pissed than I. Speaking of my wife being pissed, it looks like I'll be patronizing a floral shop tomorrow, as I passed on a quite night at home for an unbelievable evening of fishing - so between fishing and work, my wife took care of my son all day. I've gotta get up in 5 1/2 hrs and do another full-time week at work, which sucks because I'm used to spending all but 20-30 hrs/wk with my son. The chief wants me to stay full-time permanently, but I guarantee that's not going to happen. I finally have a job I love, but 9 mos out of the year I have a full-time class load and 2 part time jobs. I'm not pissing these 3 mos away. I think I'll scrap the Linux-on-my-Mac idea. It'd be beautiful could I get it working, but I think I'll just run it on Ol' Bessie for the time being. I can't believe I'm rambling over the internet. When do I get my "Certified Geek" badge? I should go to bed, but I really enjoy the lucidity of the late night/early morn. I had to buy a size 33 waist after being a 32 since Junior High. I guess it's time to start working out like my shrink wants me to. I'm surprised I don't have "secretaries butt," considering how much time I park my ass in front of the computer. Maybe I do, I can't see my ass very well. Jesus, I'm hairy. I wonder if I'll be one of those guys with thick, black hair everywhere except the top of my head. Maybe if my back hair gets long enough, I can braid it and put beads in it. I hear that drives chicks wild. I guess the real question is whether or not to hit that submit button. I can't imagine marcus or James being too amused paying for the bandwidth to cover this post. Maybe I can make it up to them if I click some links and buy more stuff. But then I'll have to explain to my wife why I needed a Chia Pet from Amazon, and I don't think I can B.S. that well. I'm good, but I'm not that good. The thread will probably sink like a rock, anyway, so I guess it's no skin off my nose. It's odd that I can argue for the existence of a merciful Creator, given the existence of mosquitos. It's time to go to bed. The missus never sleeps well if I'm not in the bed with her. I wonder why."

Posted by septimus on 07-31-2001 07:22 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
Nope, this is the original subject...

I was referring to inanity in general...

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:52 AM.

Pages (73): « First ... « 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 » ... Last »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page