Re: The Whole Universe as a Finite Binary String?

On Nov 14, 9:52 pm, Seanpit <seanpitnos...@naturalselection.
0catch.com> wrote:
On Nov 14, 12:31 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:



On Nov 14, 12:42 am, Seanpit <seanpitnos...@naturalselection.

0catch.com> wrote:
On Nov 13, 12:52 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Nov 12, 7:04 pm, Seanpit <seanpitnos...@naturalselection.

0catch.com> wrote:
On Nov 12, 9:29 am, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

There's not controversy there.
However,Sean'sassertion was that "all information in the whole
universe *over all time* could be represented by a single binary
string of digits".

By Richard's logic, if someone were to say that their stock was at an
"all time high" or that "spam is at an all time high" Richard would
automatically assume that they were talking about past and future.

If someone said that this stock was at an "all time high", I would
assume that they meant it was at an all time high.
IF someone said this stock was at the highest level "in all time", I
would presume that they were referring to the future as well as the
past.

Yeah right. Now you are highlighting prepositions were before you
were highlighting the word "all" as being the key word of contention.

If someone builds a monument "for all time", do you think that they
are referring only to the past?

One doesn't build a monument to last only in the past. A monument is
specifically built to survive at leat a little way into the future if
it is to have any past at all.

This is not the same as saying that the universe has existed "over
time" or "over a certain amount of time".

How about "over all time"?
Generally, "all" means "all". Or does "all* in Pitmannese exclude some
parts of what it is referring to?

Often people use the phrase "all time" to mean all historical time.

Possibly.
But when the use the phrase "over all time", what do you think that
they mean?

This is a very common usage of the term "all" - to mean all time that
has already taken place.

It's a rather more common useage of the word "all" to include "all".

Besides, the discussion in question is in
context of my discussion with R. Baldwin

Oh? So it's not the context of the reply you gave to Richard Harter
four days later.
Glad we're clear on that.

where I made it very clear
that the portion of the string's I was talking about was historically
produced or historical information.

That is the basis of all science
since we humans do not have access to future information.


But the context in which the post to which you refer was made was a
dispute over your assertion that the past history of a string could be
used to predict the future that string! This implies rather strongly
that when you referred made the assertion that "all information in the
whole universe over all
time could be represented by a single binary string of digits"
included the future as well as the past.

To quote your own words "Like your erroneous notion that the past
history of a string cannot be used to predict the future of the string
to any useful degree? "

So when you made that assertion, you were wrong. Or is there some
other context which makes it clear that you meant something different
which can be found in a post you made a few days later?

To quote the context of this discussion:

"The hypothesis that the string is in fact the result of a biased
and therefore predictable source can be reasonably accepted and the
null hypothesis of a random origin can be reasonably rejected based
only on prior history with the string itself - upon a prior history of
successful predictions of a chosen martingale or algorithm."

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/f3650d5a5a1cef73

That assertion was made in the context of whether or not the past
behaviour of a string can be used to predict the future behaviour of
the string.. There is nothing in this which would lead anyone to think
that when you made the assertion "all information in the whole
universe over all time could be represented by a single binary string
of digits" was referring only to the past, and it implies rather
strongly that it refers to the future as well. After all, if the
history of the string can be used to predict the future of the string,
the string in question refers to future as well as past events.


Why not just admit that you were in error when you made your
assertion, or that you expressed yourself badly?

Why not just admit that perhaps you misinterpreted the context or
intent of the statement and went just a bit overboard in your
accusations when you could have easily cleared things up for yourself
by asking a simple question: "Are you talking about all past time or
all past and future time?"

It's much more fun to watch you tie yourself in knots, Sean.

RF


RF

Sean Pitmanwww.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Quantum Phase Compactification via Spacetime Expansion
    ... Non-relativistic string theory was introuced by d'Alembert, in 1747, ... entangled quantum states cannot leak out of the closed system. ... three spatial dimensions plus time, ... single history, but it has every possible history, and each history ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Quantum Phase Compactification via Spacetime Expansion
    ... Non-relativistic string theory was introuced by d'Alembert, in 1747, ... entangled quantum states cannot leak out of the closed system. ... three spatial dimensions plus time, ... single history, but it has every possible history, and each history ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Whole Universe as a Finite Binary String?
    ... would presume that they were referring to the future as well as the ... To quote the context of this discussion: ... "The hypothesis that the string is in fact the result of a biased ... only on prior history with the string itself - upon a prior history of ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: consolidating tables
    ... I'm attempting to consolidate multiple tables with similar ... by calling him Monkey Boy - he hated it. ... Public Function getFieldNames(tblName As String) As String ... "Build History") ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • Re: FindinFiles accross all file versions
    ... VSS's find in files does not allow searching in history. ... you can take advantage on the file-based structure of the VSS ... Latest version of files in the VSS database are stored in files like ... database and identify the physical file containing the string. ...
    (microsoft.public.vstudio.sourcesafe)