aw man!
i forgot my other sci-fi story again!
my mood:
oy!: I'm happy
iiieeee!: I'm psycho
dude: I'm not in a very good mood
AHHHH!: I'm mad
Important MessageYou are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login. |
sci-fi discussion, if u have something wierd to in ur head p
This is where you can discuss your homework, family, just about anything, make strange sounds and otherwise discuss things which are really not related to the Lancer-series. Yes that means you can discuss other games.
71 posts
• Page 4 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Thu Sep 25, 2003 4:48 pm
An interesting question Stinger. As always, the 'common sense' aspect we attempt to apply to the subject fails miserably, since we have absolutely no (zip, zero) conception of two critical factors in the equation. We don't know how large the universe is (infinite, or finite?), and we don't know the odds of life spontaneously occuring. Time as well, is possibly finite, as for instance, with a big bang theory. Without knowing the answer to these there is nothing to apply common sense, or gut instinct to.
Yes the universe is big, and yes it is old. We have (BigX) times (BigY) times (smallZ) = (BigX)(BigY)(SmallZ), where X is space, Y is time, and Z is the probability per unit of time of life occuring in a given area of space. Without knowing at least the degree of magnitude of any one of these factors, we can't even surmise whether it is probable or not. The likelyhood of life on other planets remains a complete unknown. Maybe, maybe not. We can let gut instinct stray into this territory where it has no right to go, or we can just use some simple math to realize we end up with a big X. On the other hand, that's no reason not to hypothesize and investigate, or even attempt to support our hypothesis that there is other life. We should just be aware that we don't have the tools to test that argument as of yet.
Yes the universe is big, and yes it is old. We have (BigX) times (BigY) times (smallZ) = (BigX)(BigY)(SmallZ), where X is space, Y is time, and Z is the probability per unit of time of life occuring in a given area of space. Without knowing at least the degree of magnitude of any one of these factors, we can't even surmise whether it is probable or not. The likelyhood of life on other planets remains a complete unknown. Maybe, maybe not. We can let gut instinct stray into this territory where it has no right to go, or we can just use some simple math to realize we end up with a big X. On the other hand, that's no reason not to hypothesize and investigate, or even attempt to support our hypothesis that there is other life. We should just be aware that we don't have the tools to test that argument as of yet.
Fri Sep 26, 2003 2:28 pm
OMG! This is the perfect place to say this...
Is the universe infinite with infinite mass? I say no and here is why. If that were true, and the universe was not in a repeating patern that the probability of any and everything imaginable (and an infinite # that aren't) would be 1/1... and everything would exist and infinite number of times! You could meet an infinite number of yourselves!
Unfortunately that would mean that giant sentient eggplants would create and activate a device capeable of destroying the said universe an infinite number of times per second. This we know that there is finite matter in the universe
"I know the situation, just tell me what's changed" - Civ III
Is the universe infinite with infinite mass? I say no and here is why. If that were true, and the universe was not in a repeating patern that the probability of any and everything imaginable (and an infinite # that aren't) would be 1/1... and everything would exist and infinite number of times! You could meet an infinite number of yourselves!
Unfortunately that would mean that giant sentient eggplants would create and activate a device capeable of destroying the said universe an infinite number of times per second. This we know that there is finite matter in the universe
"I know the situation, just tell me what's changed" - Civ III
Fri Sep 26, 2003 3:08 pm
the thing about infinity is that you can't ever prove that something is infinite...you can only hypothosise.
there isn't a single calculation that can be truly classed as "infinite"....I hear you all reaching for your maths books screaming "hang on a second, what about reoccuring numbers, they're infinite"...but you can only hypothosise that its infinite because you can't prove otherwise. its an error in human thought methinks....
think about it this way, you build a machine using new unknown technology that is capable of doing any calculation known or otherwise....you set about doing a calculation that would normally result in a reoccuring "infinite" number. The machine makes the calculation and churns out results until its battery runs out or the world ends....have you proved that the calculation is infinite? no not at all. all you have proved is that the calculation was so hard the machine couldn't cope with it. but the human error occurs here....because the machine churned out what was seemingly the same number for its entire lifetime we automatically say, "ok, that calculation is infinite".
Wrong. We should be saying, "we can conclude that there is a strong possibility that inifinity exists, however, if there was the slightest change in nano-figures during that calculation, the change will suggest finity. Lets now build a billions of machines that can look at machine no.1's results individually and check that there was no change at a nano level". And when those machines die, you build machine's to check their results, and so on until there are no resources. Fact of the matter is, it could never be proved or disproved.
If machine no.1 could reach a logical conclusion of inifinity it would in itself prove that the calculation was finite. Therefore, if you prove infinity your are in fact proving the complete opposite....finity.
here endeth the lesson.
now ask me if there's a god
there isn't a single calculation that can be truly classed as "infinite"....I hear you all reaching for your maths books screaming "hang on a second, what about reoccuring numbers, they're infinite"...but you can only hypothosise that its infinite because you can't prove otherwise. its an error in human thought methinks....
think about it this way, you build a machine using new unknown technology that is capable of doing any calculation known or otherwise....you set about doing a calculation that would normally result in a reoccuring "infinite" number. The machine makes the calculation and churns out results until its battery runs out or the world ends....have you proved that the calculation is infinite? no not at all. all you have proved is that the calculation was so hard the machine couldn't cope with it. but the human error occurs here....because the machine churned out what was seemingly the same number for its entire lifetime we automatically say, "ok, that calculation is infinite".
Wrong. We should be saying, "we can conclude that there is a strong possibility that inifinity exists, however, if there was the slightest change in nano-figures during that calculation, the change will suggest finity. Lets now build a billions of machines that can look at machine no.1's results individually and check that there was no change at a nano level". And when those machines die, you build machine's to check their results, and so on until there are no resources. Fact of the matter is, it could never be proved or disproved.
If machine no.1 could reach a logical conclusion of inifinity it would in itself prove that the calculation was finite. Therefore, if you prove infinity your are in fact proving the complete opposite....finity.
here endeth the lesson.
now ask me if there's a god
Sun Sep 28, 2003 7:08 am
Heh, neat.
Anyway... think of the universe like a balloon. It's big and rubber and... ookay... wrong analogy.
Think of the universe as a large sphere. Now, say we were a two dimensional being living on the surface of this sphere. Now, travel off in a direction. Keep going, and you'll eventually get to where you started from. But you haven't turned around in any left-right direction. (Since we're two dimensional creatures, we have no concept of a third dimension - up/down.) So we somehow got back to where we were even though we travelled in one direction.
I think that's what our universe is like, only add a dimension. We can get a super-warp engine that makes us go 1 000 000 000 times the speed of light (not that that's possible, but assuming that we could) we might spend a decade or two travelling, but eventually we'll get back to wherever we started from, even though we never rotated in any of our 3 dimensional directions.
So, I guess the universe is just a big hypersphere. There is no edge or end to it, but it occupies a finite space.
(At least, that's what I think)
Anyway... think of the universe like a balloon. It's big and rubber and... ookay... wrong analogy.
Think of the universe as a large sphere. Now, say we were a two dimensional being living on the surface of this sphere. Now, travel off in a direction. Keep going, and you'll eventually get to where you started from. But you haven't turned around in any left-right direction. (Since we're two dimensional creatures, we have no concept of a third dimension - up/down.) So we somehow got back to where we were even though we travelled in one direction.
I think that's what our universe is like, only add a dimension. We can get a super-warp engine that makes us go 1 000 000 000 times the speed of light (not that that's possible, but assuming that we could) we might spend a decade or two travelling, but eventually we'll get back to wherever we started from, even though we never rotated in any of our 3 dimensional directions.
So, I guess the universe is just a big hypersphere. There is no edge or end to it, but it occupies a finite space.
(At least, that's what I think)
Sun Sep 28, 2003 6:19 pm
@Gromit - good point, but I was stating that the universe couldn't be infinite, nor could it have infinite mass... sooo there is an end to the universe out there somewhere which is defined by matter. Between all particles of matter the universe exists, sorta like a tree falling in a forest and making a sound. this is being formulated at this moment, so it is a bit incoherent.
So by breaching the borders of the universe, you expand the universe... or do you simply prove it exists where you are?
BTW - If the universe had infinite mass, every point in said universe would be infinitely dense with matter and we wouldn't be alive as we know it because the universe can't be infinite with infinite mass or probability goes haywire.
"Infinite" is a handy term us petty humans use to define anything without limit, of inconcieveable scome, etc. so its literal meaning is subject to discussion.
Is there a god? I would say probably. If that takes off I'll tell you why...
"Like a mighty castle our friendship shall survive, though the very heavens rain, er, big rocks down apon it" - Civ III
So by breaching the borders of the universe, you expand the universe... or do you simply prove it exists where you are?
BTW - If the universe had infinite mass, every point in said universe would be infinitely dense with matter and we wouldn't be alive as we know it because the universe can't be infinite with infinite mass or probability goes haywire.
"Infinite" is a handy term us petty humans use to define anything without limit, of inconcieveable scome, etc. so its literal meaning is subject to discussion.
Is there a god? I would say probably. If that takes off I'll tell you why...
"Like a mighty castle our friendship shall survive, though the very heavens rain, er, big rocks down apon it" - Civ III
Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:07 am
hehehe don't get me started on "is there a god"...I wrote a 20,000 word thesis on it once
@Bob I was with you 100% until you said...
surely thats not necessarily true? ....but I'm not a expert in physics, so I open this to the floor....if the universe had infinite mass, would that mean that every point in the universe would HAVE to be infinitely dense with matter? Please explain!
if that is true Bob, your conclusions are completely sound, I'm just a little confused by that.
@whasp....bake your noodle on this a sec...imagine the sphere that you talked about is moving randomly around a large open space, which contains other spheres (which we just don't know about yet), what would happen when two sphere's collide? would that effect our position in our sphere?
in hindsight, forget it, maybe thats a little be too far away from the topic
@Bob I was with you 100% until you said...
If the universe had infinite mass, every point in said universe would be infinitely dense with matter
surely thats not necessarily true? ....but I'm not a expert in physics, so I open this to the floor....if the universe had infinite mass, would that mean that every point in the universe would HAVE to be infinitely dense with matter? Please explain!
if that is true Bob, your conclusions are completely sound, I'm just a little confused by that.
@whasp....bake your noodle on this a sec...imagine the sphere that you talked about is moving randomly around a large open space, which contains other spheres (which we just don't know about yet), what would happen when two sphere's collide? would that effect our position in our sphere?
in hindsight, forget it, maybe thats a little be too far away from the topic
Mon Sep 29, 2003 6:50 pm
...and an impossible one to prove (see last post)
I see your point....so getting back to the original topic....if space is so big and invariably unexplored (as we've all proved to ourselves), how can we possibly believe that we are alone? and more importantly, how can we possibly believe that humans are likely to be superior to other "unknown" beings? doesn't make sense to me at all....
I see your point....so getting back to the original topic....if space is so big and invariably unexplored (as we've all proved to ourselves), how can we possibly believe that we are alone? and more importantly, how can we possibly believe that humans are likely to be superior to other "unknown" beings? doesn't make sense to me at all....
71 posts
• Page 4 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5