1: There is no such thing as choice which is not random. 2: 2nd law of thermodynamics. 3: Maya
1 and 3 being related to 'free-will'.
some people do not have Maya.
given that a system of ethics should be one where all people and things are treated equally (yes you should treat up like a golf ball) given the 2nd law, such a system should also be balanced a system based on ownership would only be balanced if the ownership was balanced, that is neither a capitalist nor academic system. wikipedia is near a balanced system, though some people are said to be more authoritative without merit (ie the subject is a philosophical one, like mathematics and not an empirically testable one like umm.... philosophy)
You do realise that due to a patent on highly inefficiency low pressure condensing steam engine, a guy who had a much better more efficient one (possibly high pressure I can't remember) the world was stuck with crappy steam engines.
Also Stevenson's rocket benefited from quite a number of inventions that weren't copyrighted (for instance tubes running through the firebox as part of the boiler)
Mathematics has done really well, despite not having patent and computer software would benefit from no parents, so why should other more abstract things be much different?
entropy, stating that the entropy of an isolated system which is not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium; and that the entropy change dS of a system.
so, the system of determinism must be in equilibrium or balanced, random is the equilibral system for determinism.
Also a symmetric system must also be balanced, so every symmetric system mush have a corresponding a-symmetric system.
latent momentum (e.g. the speed of light, or time) are an example of a-symmetry, This can be seen as the accelerating expansion or the universe for instance.
dark energy (or just plain only none particular energy, or space) is balanced by gravity, or lack of space or time or mass whatever you want to call it.
That system has been measured to be a-symmetrical and unbalanced, however particular things are balanced so it could be viewed as something which balanced the symmetry of the particle system.
For instance, if you mix matter and space then that matter spreads out over space and collapses as if the space element is amorphous in nature. This balances the morphs nature of common matter.
Also, lack of gravity waves also points to a 'perfect' system, between the amorphous nature of space (no direct measures of dark-energy, or any sign of gravitational waves) and the seeming determinant nature of common / measured matter.
take a system that creates wave function collapse.
make a symmetrical version, symmetrical with identical connotations.
now perform the two slit experiment on both.
both systems are identical, all but for the difference between the definitive results of each wave function collapse.
There is a difference, that difference is variable and random, you can't measure the entropy, yet it is not zero. So something has been created, but the systems are symmetrical, no difference between them, or a constant difference between them.
so something has been created nothing exists, except random.
other types of none-obvious creation could be for instance.
If I apply impulse to an object (in a low or relative zero gravity vacuum). The object will move away from me.
This creates distance between myself and the object, or you could say it creates space between myself and it.
You could say it's moving through space, or you could say it's creating space dependant on your perspective or that of the observer.
also, what about time. Always moving forward. Now that could still be symmetrical if for instance you view time as relative to movement/size (for want of a better word). Now if you say that you must have a size otherwise you become zero point, or singular and gravity becomes instant, it's quite easy to say that time could cause size via 'movement' in the shape of a torus for instance, and that the movement could be clockwise or anti-clockwise, forming a closed loop, [possibly a string?]. It would be collapsed though, so measurements would still be probabilistic and uncertain/random. This feature can only exist due to collapse, collapse is relatively nothing so the feature of probabilist or uncertainty or random comes out of nothing and only nothing. (space is not nothing, it is space)
for a start it creates Newton's second law of thermodynamics.
Newton also created calculus did he not? what's that +c bit all about. What would happen if you collapsed, say from 1 dimensions down into a measurement?
and why should being 'so called' physical have anything to do with anything?
Is energy, time, space, electro magnetism, the strong force, the weak force etc... physical. What about matter? is that physical?
If so please tell me the difference between them? e (so I'm told) equals MC^2. That would also mean that C (the speed of light or space time) also equal matter and energy.
So, tell me again. What do you mean by physical? Is the speed of light physical? cos I think that is equal to the root of energy over matter. or that energy over matter creates the speed of light.
noting comes before it, so random comes out of [after] nothing.
I don't believe that there's anything else that fits the bill. And random certainly exists just as much as anything else in physics or mathematics. It can be measured via induction.
I should say that space is not nothing, it is space.
for instance. If I take a mass and apply a force to it. giving it energy I create movement. This movement is in effect creating space between myself and the object.
energy and space are strongly related.
there's also something that's claimed not to have been 'measured' called dark energy.
Though when you can tell me what a measurement is I will believe you that measurements or whatever haven't happened.
Also, when you can tell me what matter is or time then I'll also consider not knowing what dark energy is in a different light.
the opposite of random is predictable / deterministic.
the interface is both (entanglement for instance)
the symmetry for that symmetry would be an a-symmetry. So the a-symmetry of the injection caused by random, is actually symmetrical to the symmetry if random - deterministic/predictable.
what comes after random, well you can use it as an injection point into the axiom of choice. (given random, you then have a starting point in the uncountably infinite set starting from -infinity and going to +infinity)
What created random? it was created randomly, out of nothing, nothing came before it.
no that does not predicate free-will (in the conscious sense as the outcome would be random and not will-full/a 'choice' [whatever a choice is])
Slashdot Mirror
they aren't independent.
They have an agreement with Sweden, on tax and work and housing and all sorts.
I find talking to them usually works. If that fails, pretend to come on to them.
someone should have gotten you a chess set.
I find your faith in Occam's Razor... amusing.
b.t.w. it's the second law of thermodynamics.
I find your faith in Occam's Razor... amusing.
a fool and his knowledge are easily parted.
in some grand sense moving forward or just changing a lot is not a scientifically decidable question, at least for the foreseeable future.
start trekking across the universe, were only moving forward because we can't find reverse.
is someone who takes their time to think about something smarter than someone who makes snap decisions?
(c)
a followed by people asserting b on the government and overthrowing it.
I'm all for c.
1: There is no such thing as choice which is not random.
2: 2nd law of thermodynamics.
3: Maya
1 and 3 being related to 'free-will'.
some people do not have Maya.
given that a system of ethics should be one where all people and things are treated equally (yes you should treat up like a golf ball)
given the 2nd law, such a system should also be balanced
a system based on ownership would only be balanced if the ownership was balanced, that is neither a capitalist nor academic system. wikipedia is near a balanced system, though some people are said to be more authoritative without merit (ie the subject is a philosophical one, like mathematics and not an empirically testable one like umm.... philosophy)
o2, oxygen was/is poisonous to most early life.
Still I suppose it could still be happening in the deep.
brilliant choice,
You do realise that due to a patent on highly inefficiency low pressure condensing steam engine, a guy who had a much better more efficient one (possibly high pressure I can't remember) the world was stuck with crappy steam engines.
Also Stevenson's rocket benefited from quite a number of inventions that weren't copyrighted (for instance tubes running through the firebox as part of the boiler)
Mathematics has done really well, despite not having patent and computer software would benefit from no parents, so why should other more abstract things be much different?
entropy, stating that the entropy of an isolated system which is not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium; and that the entropy change dS of a system.
so, the system of determinism must be in equilibrium or balanced, random is the equilibral system for determinism.
Also a symmetric system must also be balanced, so every symmetric system mush have a corresponding a-symmetric system.
latent momentum (e.g. the speed of light, or time) are an example of a-symmetry,
This can be seen as the accelerating expansion or the universe for instance.
dark energy (or just plain only none particular energy, or space) is balanced by gravity, or lack of space or time or mass whatever you want to call it.
That system has been measured to be a-symmetrical and unbalanced, however particular things are balanced so it could be viewed as something which balanced the symmetry of the particle system.
For instance, if you mix matter and space then that matter spreads out over space and collapses as if the space element is amorphous in nature. This balances the morphs nature of common matter.
Also, lack of gravity waves also points to a 'perfect' system, between the amorphous nature of space (no direct measures of dark-energy, or any sign of gravitational waves) and the seeming determinant nature of common / measured matter.
take a system that creates wave function collapse.
make a symmetrical version, symmetrical with identical connotations.
now perform the two slit experiment on both.
both systems are identical, all but for the difference between the definitive results of each wave function collapse.
There is a difference, that difference is variable and random, you can't measure the entropy, yet it is not zero. So something has been created, but the systems are symmetrical, no difference between them, or a constant difference between them.
so something has been created nothing exists, except random.
other types of none-obvious creation could be for instance.
If I apply impulse to an object (in a low or relative zero gravity vacuum). The object will move away from me.
This creates distance between myself and the object, or you could say it creates space between myself and it.
You could say it's moving through space, or you could say it's creating space dependant on your perspective or that of the observer.
also, what about time. Always moving forward. /random. This feature can only exist due to collapse, collapse is relatively nothing so the feature of probabilist or uncertainty or random comes out of nothing and only nothing. (space is not nothing, it is space)
Now that could still be symmetrical if for instance you view time as relative to movement/size (for want of a better word). Now if you say that you must have a size otherwise you become zero point, or singular and gravity becomes instant, it's quite easy to say that time could cause size via 'movement' in the shape of a torus for instance, and that the movement could be clockwise or anti-clockwise, forming a closed loop, [possibly a string?]. It would be collapsed though, so measurements would still be probabilistic and uncertain
for a start it creates Newton's second law of thermodynamics.
Newton also created calculus did he not?
what's that +c bit all about. What would happen if you collapsed, say from 1 dimensions down into a measurement?
is the result of the collapse predictable?
Yeh, I often find that people with beliefs are completely uncomprehending after a few sentences.
but ultimately, god works in mysterious ways.
very old school form of commentary on spontaneous creation.
what do you mean by physical?
and why should being 'so called' physical have anything to do with anything?
Is energy, time, space, electro magnetism, the strong force, the weak force etc... physical. What about matter? is that physical?
If so please tell me the difference between them? e (so I'm told) equals MC^2. That would also mean that C (the speed of light or space time) also equal matter and energy.
So, tell me again. What do you mean by physical? Is the speed of light physical? cos I think that is equal to the root of energy over matter. or that energy over matter creates the speed of light.
enter random.
define: random. not predictable.
noting comes before it, so random comes out of [after] nothing.
I don't believe that there's anything else that fits the bill. And random certainly exists just as much as anything else in physics or mathematics.
It can be measured via induction.
article title clearly mentions backdoor.
ping is clearly intended to be a backdoor beauty.
apple
a-pull
a-poll
a-p-holl
a-p-hole
pee in you a-hole.
steve jobs
steven jobs
stephan jobs
stephand jobs
steph hand jobs
stiff hand jobs pees in your a-hole.
stiff hand jabs pee in your a-hole.
i-phone
i-phoney
I, phoney stiff hand, jabs pee in your a-hole.
i-fad
i-prod
can you flash-a mac?
Mac OsX
Mac Osex
Mac 0 Sex
Mac = zero sex.
hardly surprising the west is capitalist [free will] and the east is communist [you are one with everything].
I should say that space is not nothing, it is space.
for instance.
If I take a mass and apply a force to it. giving it energy I create movement. This movement is in effect creating space between myself and the object.
energy and space are strongly related.
there's also something that's claimed not to have been 'measured' called dark energy.
Though when you can tell me what a measurement is I will believe you that measurements or whatever haven't happened.
Also, when you can tell me what matter is or time then I'll also consider not knowing what dark energy is in a different light.
the opposite of random is predictable / deterministic.
the interface is both (entanglement for instance)
the symmetry for that symmetry would be an a-symmetry. So the a-symmetry of the injection caused by random, is actually symmetrical to the symmetry if random - deterministic/predictable.
rinse wash repeat.
see you at 011i.*
define: random.
Not predictable.
predict, predicate, to come before.
random, nothing comes before it.
what comes after nothing? random.
what comes after random, well you can use it as an injection point into the axiom of choice. (given random, you then have a starting point in the uncountably infinite set starting from -infinity and going to +infinity)
What created random? it was created randomly, out of nothing, nothing came before it.
no that does not predicate free-will (in the conscious sense as the outcome would be random and not will-full /a 'choice' [whatever a choice is])
works as a joke.