Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-09-2007, 09:16 AM   #1
schemanista
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Does the universe in fact contain almost no information?

I think I just broke something reading this. You'll need a postscript viewer like Ghostscript to read it. PM me if you want a PDF.

If it's valid (and maybe only Choobus is qualified to judge), I think it pretty much puts the boots to the Dembskis and the Francis-es.

Last edited by Professor Chaos; 10-09-2007 at 10:58 AM. Reason: Fixed link
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 09:37 AM   #2
Choobus
I Live Here
 
Choobus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
I can't see it

You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there's the glory hole option, but don't expect more than ... tips.
~ Philiboid Studge
Choobus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 09:44 AM   #3
Kate
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,423
What, you're a watchmaker now?

"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 10:23 AM   #4
RenaissanceMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
schemanista wrote View Post
I think I just broke something reading this. You'll need a postscript viewer like Ghostscript to read it. PM me if you want a PDF.

If it's valid (and maybe only Choobus is qualified to judge), I think it pretty much puts the boots to the Dembskis and the Francis-es.
I couldn't view the document either, but that really doesn't matter.

I have a problem with the statement: "If it's valid, I think it pretty much puts the boots to the Dembskis and the Francis-es."

It doesn't matter if this new hypothesis is valid or not. The hypotheses that the Dembskis and the Francis-es try to push fail on their own accord. Even positing the question "If this is valid, then this other hypothesis is cooked" implies that the hypothesis in question was still in a position of being tested... not the failed trash it already was.

These idiot creation 'theories' (read untenable hypotheses) only thrive because people debate them AS IF they had legitimacy. Don't debate these fools on their own terms... which is what happens when you start debating the legitamacy of the theological dogmas that form the basis of the hypothesis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 10:51 AM   #5
schemanista
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Kate wrote View Post
What, you're a watchmaker now?
?

Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote View Post
These idiot creation 'theories' (read untenable hypotheses) only thrive because people debate them AS IF they had legitimacy. Don't debate these fools on their own terms... which is what happens when you start debating the legitamacy of the theological dogmas that form the basis of the hypothesis.
Ouch. I obviously hadn't thought about it that way.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 10:59 AM   #6
Professor Chaos
General of the Attacking Army
 
Professor Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,904
Link fixed, try it now.

I will grieve. Grief is not a theistic concept. ~ Sternwallow
Professor Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 10:59 AM   #7
Professor Chaos
General of the Attacking Army
 
Professor Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,904
I'd be interested in seeing a pdf, btw.

I will grieve. Grief is not a theistic concept. ~ Sternwallow
Professor Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 02:05 PM   #8
Smellyoldgit
Stinkin' Mod
 
Smellyoldgit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,532
Can't see it & updated link don't open.

Stop the Holy See men!
Smellyoldgit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 03:54 PM   #9
Jeremy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
schemanista wrote View Post
I think I just broke something reading this. You'll need a postscript viewer like Ghostscript to read it. PM me if you want a PDF.

If it's valid (and maybe only Choobus is qualified to judge), I think it pretty much puts the boots to the Dembskis and the Francis-es.
Hey shem,

I'm having trouble sending you a PM. Could you send me one at noahnywno@hotmail.com?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 05:30 PM   #10
schemanista
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Try this
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 08:19 PM   #11
Jeremy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
schemanista wrote View Post
Try this
Thank you sir. I'll give it a read tomorrow.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 07:24 AM   #12
RenaissanceMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
It seems to me the author is laboring under the solipsistic view that the 'observer' observing waveform collapse must have purpose in it's observation.

Ergo sum, since the entire universe cannot be observed at once, then the entire universe can be compressed down to it's unobserved state.

That seems ridiculous to me. every wave function within a quantum frame (Assuming I'm using the terms correctly) is an 'observer' contributing to the state of all other wave functions in the frame.

Since it's reasonable to assume that this 'observation' of the local quantum frames comprises a continuous span of every wave function in the universe (Indirectly in some cases.... a galaxy so far away that it's traveling faster than light in relation to us in no longer in any 'quantum frame' directly accessible to a wave function proximal to ourselves.)

As such, the 'information content of the universe' is the state transitions over time for the sum total of realized wave function interactions... that's gotta be a lot of data.

But I'm just a lay-guy struggling to understand this shit... feel free to tell me how wrong my conclusion is.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 09:33 AM   #13
Choobus
I Live Here
 
Choobus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote View Post
(Indirectly in some cases.... a galaxy so far away that it's traveling faster than light in relation to us in no longer in any 'quantum frame' directly accessible to a wave function proximal to ourselves.)

???? What? Einstein would bitchslap you for that, andf I would hold his jacket while he did so. And then Bell would show you a different kind of inequality involving the radius of a rectum and a fist.

You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there's the glory hole option, but don't expect more than ... tips.
~ Philiboid Studge
Choobus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 10:31 AM   #14
RenaissanceMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Choobus wrote View Post
???? What? Einstein would bitchslap you for that, andf I would hold his jacket while he did so. And then Bell would show you a different kind of inequality involving the radius of a rectum and a fist.
Pray tell, why would Einstein be bitch slapping me for that? There's nothing in relativity stopping two galaxies from having a delta velocity that exceeds the speed of light. They just can't see each other anymore.

The question I would ask... is can they still interact at all? I'm going to assume not.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 10:39 AM   #15
Choobus
I Live Here
 
Choobus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote View Post
Pray tell, why would Einstein be bitch slapping me for that? There's nothing in relativity stopping two galaxies from having a delta velocity that exceeds the speed of light. They just can't see each other anymore.

The question I would ask... is can they still interact at all? I'm going to assume not.
what is a delta velocity?

You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there's the glory hole option, but don't expect more than ... tips.
~ Philiboid Studge
Choobus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:04 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational