10-09-2007, 09:16 AM
|
#1
|
Guest
|
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
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 09:37 AM
|
#2
|
I Live Here
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
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 09:44 AM
|
#3
|
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,428
|
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.
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 10:23 AM
|
#4
|
Guest
|
Quote:
schemanista wrote
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.
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 10:51 AM
|
#5
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Kate wrote
What, you're a watchmaker now?
|
?
Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote
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.
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 10:59 AM
|
#6
|
General of the Attacking Army
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,904
|
Link fixed, try it now.
I will grieve. Grief is not a theistic concept. ~ Sternwallow
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 10:59 AM
|
#7
|
General of the Attacking Army
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
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 02:05 PM
|
#8
|
Stinkin' Mod
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,616
|
Can't see it & updated link don't open.
Stop the Holy See men!
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 03:54 PM
|
#9
|
Guest
|
Quote:
schemanista wrote
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?
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 05:30 PM
|
#10
|
Guest
|
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 08:19 PM
|
#11
|
Guest
|
Quote:
schemanista wrote
|
Thank you sir. I'll give it a read tomorrow.
|
|
|
10-10-2007, 07:24 AM
|
#12
|
Guest
|
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.
|
|
|
10-10-2007, 09:33 AM
|
#13
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
|
Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote
(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
|
|
|
10-10-2007, 10:31 AM
|
#14
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Choobus wrote
???? 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.
|
|
|
10-10-2007, 10:39 AM
|
#15
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
|
Quote:
RenaissanceMan wrote
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
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:21 AM.
|