General > RANT
Continuance of the INfinity Proposal
gymsum:
--- Quote from: Numsgil ---Ha! Only I have the power to close topics. And they just never get closed
I did a text search for "compression". I only find things I've said, so you've never responded to the idea that I can see. Maybe you did and I just didn't understand, you sometimes drift into incoherence.
MP3 compresses raw sound files by removing all the frequencies humans can't hear anyway. And then taking what's left over and doing some compressions on it based on the fact that from millisecond to millisecond, the sound probably changes very little. Compare an MP3 and a WAV of the same sound file to see how much that can make a difference. Then listen to the two sound files and compare their audio quality. So when I say MP3 of the universe, I'm suggesting that the uninteresting bits can be removed from our understanding of it, and we're left with an understanding that is much simpler but retains all the important bits.
While I am at it, do you know what I mean when I say a lossy compression algorithm? As compared with a lossless compression algorithm?
So basically your position is that it's impossible to know everything because the universe at time t + 1 contains all the information at time t and lots of new information. And that we can move that +1 all the way down to some infinitesimal value and then we see that the universe contains infinite information. Am I correct in my understanding of what you're saying?
I am saying two points: 1. It's probably not infinite. There is a finite universe lifetime (maybe), and a finite mass/energy value in the universe. There is a huge, but finite, number of configurations that the mass/energy in our universe can do in a finite period of time. There is one exception: perhaps if the universe collapses on itself, in a big crunch, time dilation and heat would allow a period of essentially infinite data production. Maybe. 2. Even if the data in the universe is infinite, from a strictly practical point of view all the information worth knowing can be known. So even if you're right, it's a rather pathological correctness, since it has absolutely no practical relevance.
Oh, and 3. You do not have the mathematical background necessary to really approach your idea scientifically.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---C = (E^5*D^25)*L where c is a constant for universal translation
--- End quote ---
* from original post.
Translation and compression are essentially the same idea, translate similar points to one point, thus compressing the infromation. Thats all very nice taht you know everything about MP3 format, but I still I dont know when I said it was impossible to know everything, I might have stated it was impossible to know anything, but for one Im a buddhist so that thinking is not retroactive to my beliefs. Also I cant see why I could take your word as fact since you use Wikipedia as a source and haven't gone away from this topic of MP3 for some reason.
Numsgil:
You don't think Wikipedia is a reputable source?
I don't think translation and compression are the same idea at all. Especially not with a formula like C = (E^5*D^25)*L.
MP3 is a lossy compression algorithm most people are familiar with. So when I talk about lossy compression, MP3 is a good example. I don't think I'm staying on the topic of MP3 unusually long, or saying MP3 too often, or have MP3 on the brain or anything like that.
...
MP3 MP3 MP3!
Numsgil:
--- Quote ---but I still I dont know when I said it was impossible to know everything,
--- End quote ---
Hmm, does this ring any bells?
--- Quote ---So we can take the total entries in the Encyclopedia Encarta and assume that it contains ALL current and up to date information within its archives. For every entry, there will exsist 5 sets of information to explain the concept fully. For every set, there will be an entirely other set of information to be used in the Dictionary to agian relate the 5 sets to themselves. So what is the total amount of information that can possibly be gained from the universe? Well its quite large, so large in fact, that the Universe itself would fit in it multiple times if it were quantified as volume.
...
To know how much of the total information has been collected (not assuming this information adds to the previous series), we take all the knonw information an individual posses for say 100 people world wide, multiply that by the total population of the earth and divide it by the Total. So while we learn more, the percentage of knonw information grows incredibly slow, while the total number of known things grows exponentialy.
--- End quote ---
Sure sounds like you're saying it's impossible to me.
...
MP3!
gymsum:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA the 10th dimension part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySBaYMESb8o part 2
theres your MP3....
Numsgil:
?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version