randomness

Anything else
User avatar
Ragdollmaster
Posts: 2343
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 11:49 am
Location: Island of Lugaru

Re: randomness

Post by Ragdollmaster » Sun May 27, 2012 6:36 am


User avatar
Freshbite
Posts: 3256
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 3:02 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden.

Re: randomness

Post by Freshbite » Sun May 27, 2012 6:59 am

wat

I don't ..

H-How? I mean..

wat

User avatar
Jacktheawesome
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:06 am
Location: In Zulway's foot palace.
Contact:

Re: randomness

Post by Jacktheawesome » Sun May 27, 2012 11:11 am

Goddammit science! You're supposed to make sense!

User avatar
zoidberg rules
Posts: 1788
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:44 pm

Re: randomness

Post by zoidberg rules » Sun May 27, 2012 12:20 pm

How delightfully Douglas Adams.

User avatar
Jacktheawesome
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:06 am
Location: In Zulway's foot palace.
Contact:

Re: randomness

Post by Jacktheawesome » Sun May 27, 2012 12:29 pm

Yes, the only logical next step is Bistromathics.

User avatar
Zelron
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:29 pm
Location: In the land of Cyberland

Re: randomness

Post by Zelron » Sun May 27, 2012 12:52 pm

Science you say?

User avatar
Assaultman67
Posts: 2109
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 9:06 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: randomness

Post by Assaultman67 » Sun May 27, 2012 6:56 pm

Ragdollmaster wrote:Wait what

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2 ... pens-cause

I just

wat
Old news.

The idea of instantaneous computing is very cool though

If the output proceeds the input, I could process the most complex finite formulas and always get an answer.

So if I wanted to optimize, say, a car. As long as I could define the parameters in which that car would be successful (ergonomics, gas mileage, applicable to physical constants) I could instantly come up with the perfect design for a car instantaneously. Perfect.

This is getting pretty damn close to information time travel.

I'm sure these people are being funded by some pretty high level people.

User avatar
Jacktheawesome
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:06 am
Location: In Zulway's foot palace.
Contact:

Re: randomness

Post by Jacktheawesome » Sun May 27, 2012 7:11 pm

Assaultman67 wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:Wait what

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2 ... pens-cause

I just

wat
Old news.

The idea of instantaneous computing is very cool though

If the output proceeds the input, I could process the most complex finite formulas and always get an answer.

So if I wanted to optimize, say, a car. As long as I could define the parameters in which that car would be successful (ergonomics, gas mileage, applicable to physical constants) I could instantly come up with the perfect design for a car instantaneously. Perfect.

This is getting pretty damn close to information time travel.

I'm sure these people are being funded by some pretty high level people.
Now here's one thing I don't get: If the output does precede the input, and you can define the parameters of said output, doesn't the output then become the input? It seems like this whole retrocausality thing just doesn't make logical sense.

User avatar
Zelron
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:29 pm
Location: In the land of Cyberland

Re: randomness

Post by Zelron » Sun May 27, 2012 7:26 pm

Jacktheawesome wrote:It seems like this whole retrocausality thing just doesn't make logical sense.
Quantum Mechanics.
Don't bother wasting time on it.
Last edited by Zelron on Mon May 28, 2012 2:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jacktheawesome
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:06 am
Location: In Zulway's foot palace.
Contact:

Re: randomness

Post by Jacktheawesome » Mon May 28, 2012 12:56 am

Well, ok, let me phrase it a different way. I can accept that the output arrives before the input. What I was wondering about is that if you tamper with the output to affect the input, it seems like the the output becomes the input.

User avatar
Zelron
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:29 pm
Location: In the land of Cyberland

Re: randomness

Post by Zelron » Mon May 28, 2012 3:00 am

Logic dictates that something goes in, something comes out. It just doesn't make sense for something to come out before you've put anything in. But that's where Quantum Mechanics fits in.
My understanding of Quantum Mechanics is basicly that Quantum Mechanics is the thoery that random things happen. So this kind of non-logic totally flys because Quantum Mechanics says you don't even need a bloody reason for something to happen, it just does.
That's why I say don't bother with it, because how can you understand something that says that things happen you can't understand?

While thinking of how to write this I somehow managed to have a 15 minute rant to myself outloud about the concept of time...
New topic!

User avatar
Jacktheawesome
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:06 am
Location: In Zulway's foot palace.
Contact:

Re: randomness

Post by Jacktheawesome » Mon May 28, 2012 3:17 am

No no, I still don't think you see. See, my question really didn't have anything to do with the actual science of it; that is something which I've accepted I can only understand to a certain degree, so I, as you say, don't bother with it. My question was much more pedantic. Isn't input defined as the variable you tamper with, the x to a function's y, thus making the idea of changing the output to create an input not only scientifically boggling but literally impossible as defined by grammar, logic, and all that is holy?

User avatar
adwuga
Posts: 2176
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:09 pm
Location: America... Fuck yeah.

Re: randomness

Post by adwuga » Mon May 28, 2012 3:20 am

Yes, and that is why grammar, logic, and all that is holy sucks.

User avatar
Jacktheawesome
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:06 am
Location: In Zulway's foot palace.
Contact:

Re: randomness

Post by Jacktheawesome » Mon May 28, 2012 3:26 am

Basically my point was that Bryan is WRONG and should have his science license revoked.

But that works too.

User avatar
Zelron
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:29 pm
Location: In the land of Cyberland

Re: randomness

Post by Zelron » Mon May 28, 2012 3:43 am

I'm feeling a little rant-y right now so I may have not maybe my point clear.
Input is what you give, output is what you get. They are saying they get something before they give something. So output before input.
Logically, that's just nonsense. But not if you apply the magic of Quantum Mec-! Know what, never mind, you get the picture already. :|

Post Reply