General > RANT
Continuance of the INfinity Proposal
abyaly:
The root problem isn't something you'll be able to fix. When someone's ideas go unquestioned for too long, they never see the need to have the kind of rules we follow.
The method someone uses for putting together an argument depends on the obstacles they've had to deal with. If they have found ethos or pathos to be effective for a long time, switching away from it is really hard. Arguing using only logic is really counter-intuitive and most people won't pick it up (or even want to) unless they run into a certain kind of environment.
Numsgil:
I used to use fun things like when my parents yelled at me I'd calmly point out the logical fallacies of their argument. Something like "because I said so" can be retorted using "ipse dixit!"
Been too long, though. I'm not nearly as impartially logical as I was in the past.
gymsum:
Its geometric to time because the fact that it was remembered means that information from the previous time is contained still, and still apart of the system. THis is waht Im trying to get at. Take for example this following simpler scenario:
You have a small child that's hungry, a table and an apple. Those are three facts which are seperable, the three bodies are not the same and have different information in each. If the chidl decides to let the fruit sit wihtout eating it, the fruit will rot and regardless of the decision made the information of the apple changes because of entropy. The child can slow or quicken this entropy by its own information or using another object in this imaginary room. The amount of information contained in this room over the period of T time, is I^T. Why? Well its because each piece of information grows exponentialy to time because as time progresses more information is created (thats not saying matter is created). The amount of information is easily time1*time2*time3 since 1*2*3 would 6, and the amount of information between any object and another is always duplicated by the fact that it has a history which can be observed, so the amount of information in the same space grows exponetially to the amount of time observed and not observed. Also in theoretical geometry the 4th dimension is raised to the power of time, assuming that time could be an axis of perspective which is considerably possible given the fact that humans have quite capable minds. And I dont have any hard facts to back this, but neither does the string theory. Anyways, fun discussion. The thing you pointed to Nums would be what I refer to as Modular thought, meaning anything can be said to mean anything through translation. Which basically means I've wasted everyone's time but nonetheless it was meant to get ppl to think about abstract ideas, like assigning information values. And dinosaurs I thought broke down into fossil fuels, along with plant matter; and moose havent made us to much fuel I dont think lol.
Aby.. wow... If I understood that, I'm crazy...
Numsgil:
Just because something is increasing doesn't mean it has to be exponential. That's my point. Why can't it be F = kt, where F is facts, t is time, and k is some constant? So one second from now there'll be exactly k more facts in the universe then there were before.
abyaly:
--- Quote from: gymsum ---Aby.. wow... If I understood that, I'm crazy...
--- End quote ---
Crazy? No. It's just that your way of deciding whether or not an idea is a good one is very different from mine. This makes it hard for me to agree with most of the things you say.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version