Lessons on Causality

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Tue Sep 05, 2017 3:24 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Infinity is a process of change, hence it is always demonstrated.

A process of change is not a thing to exist, but a concept.

A person can keep counting and counting, hypothetically forever. Or a computer could.

Neither could. Hypothetically, neither could a pink unicorn. Hypotheticals do not exist.

Chaos theory depends on the concept of infinity, as does change.

Chaotic systems are simply dynamic systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions and they need not be infinite.

Change is eternal,

Not yet it ain't. When we get to infinity, then we'll see if you were right. Obviously existence could never get there to verify the claim because it's not a place that can be reached.

Existence has no meaning without a contrasting backdrop of nonexistence. Existence itself implies nonexistence. Eternal existence is an oxymoron. If a process existed eternally, then where did the eternally existing process come from? It's self-causation an infinity ago and, if it's not, then it had a state of nonexistence (ie a beginning). Existence is an alternating state of existence/nonexistence and even that process must have had a state of nonexistence.
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:09 am

All things exist; nothing does not exist.

There is no such thing as the "non-existence" of a thing. If it can be conceptualized then it must necessarily exist. Existence includes everything, even the ideals of mankind.

There are no limits to existence, absolute freedom, hence why and how the concept of infinity can be apprehended.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:32 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:There is no such thing as the "non-existence" of a thing. If it can be conceptualized then it must necessarily exist. Existence includes everything, even the ideals of mankind.

There are no limits to existence, absolute freedom, hence why and how the concept of infinity can be apprehended.

How do you know there are no limits to existence?

Everything is dualistic and there are no such things as eternally existing singularities inside this universe.

All things exist; nothing does not exist.

Therefore 0 does not exist.

So, we have the codependent pairs: 1-1, 2-2, 3-3,..., infinity - infinity.

Infinity - infinity is not defined and can be equal to anything, including infinity. So infinity cannot be a codependent pair with itself and can only be codependent on 0 because the only thing there can be infinite amount of is 0 and therefore infinity doesn't exist because it depends on nonexistence in order to exist. An infinitely big box is the same as a box that doesn't exist.

Infinity x 5 = undefined.
Infinity x infinity = undefined.
Infinity x 0 = 0. That is the only way it works because an infinity of nothing is still nothing.

Since infinity is dependent upon the existence of nothing in order to exist, then it does not exist.
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby phyllo » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:11 am

Infinity x 5 = undefined.
Infinity x infinity = undefined.
:confusion-scratchheadyellow:
Don't know where you are getting those results. Both of those evaluate to infinity according to the math books.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10101
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: ->.

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:20 am

Phyllo is right.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:32 am

phyllo wrote:
Infinity x 5 = undefined.
Infinity x infinity = undefined.
:confusion-scratchheadyellow:
Don't know where you are getting those results. Both of those evaluate to infinity according to the math books.

If infinity x infinity = infinity x 5, then 5 = infinity.

Or if infinity x 5 = infinity, then 5 = infinity/infinity?

Infinity x 5 = infinity
Infinity x 6 = infinity
So 5=6?

Anything x infinity is undefined according to math books, including 0, but I disagree because an infinity of 0 is still 0 and it's the only case that it works that way.

But if someone wants infinity x 0 to be undefined as well, then it's fine by me... either way, it doesn't exist.
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby phyllo » Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:20 am

Anything x infinity is undefined according to math books, including 0, but I disagree because an infinity of 0 is still 0 and it's the only case that it works that way.
Show us the books.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10101
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: ->.

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:44 am

phyllo wrote:
Anything x infinity is undefined according to math books, including 0, but I disagree because an infinity of 0 is still 0 and it's the only case that it works that way.
Show us the books.

Why does it matter? Are you arguing that things written in books are true because they are written in books?

Also, did you miss the part of my disagreeing with the math books?

Serendipper wrote:Anything x infinity is undefined according to math books, including 0, but I disagree


So even if you do produce a book, I won't give a crap.

I already proved infinity doesn't exist here:

All things exist; nothing does not exist.


Therefore 0 does not exist.

So, we have the codependent pairs: 1-1, 2-2, 3-3,..., infinity - infinity.

Infinity - infinity is not defined and can be equal to anything, including infinity. So infinity cannot be a codependent pair with itself and can only be codependent on 0 because the only thing there can be infinite amount of is 0 and therefore infinity doesn't exist because it depends on nonexistence in order to exist. An infinitely big box is the same as a box that doesn't exist.

Infinity x 5 = undefined (or infinity/ doesn't matter).
Infinity x infinity = undefined (or infinity/ doesn't matter).
Infinity x 0 = 0. That is the only way it works because an infinity of nothing is still nothing.

Since infinity is dependent upon the existence of nothing in order to exist, then it does not exist.
__________________________________________________________

Another way is to determine the opposite of infinity. Since 0 is smaller than the infinitesimally small, then 0 is the opposite of the infinity big. Therefore they are codependent pairs where one can't exist without the other (just like true/false, yes/no, on/off, up/down, etc). Since we already know 0 does not exist, then we know infinity does not exist. Every other number has a codependent opposite that exists.

That's the last nail in that coffin.

Anyone who doesn't believe it now is simply being religious worshipping their infinity god :bow-blue:
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby phyllo » Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:55 am

Okay. I won't waste any more time.
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10101
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: ->.

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:06 am

Seren, you seriously fail to understand what "infinity" means, and certainly are clueless concerning "infinity times infinity".
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25612
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:38 am

James S Saint wrote:Seren, you seriously fail to understand what "infinity" means, and certainly are clueless concerning "infinity times infinity".

You'll be preaching Jesus to me next. :angry-soapbox:
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Magnus Anderson » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:26 pm

Urwrong wrote:Perhaps 'Pi' is a truly random and chaotic number, but that's about it. Almost everything else, a computer can calculate.


You got it all wrong.
Pi isn't random. It's a computable number.
But the great majority of real numbers are uncomputable.

The same applies to bit strings.
Most bit strings are incompressible.

What this means, in plain terms, is that order is an exception.
It's not the rule (the way shelterted people, such as you, think.)

You might want to look into algorithmic information theory. Very good stuff. Far deeper than anything you have to say. Most of what you say, anyways, is quite simply banal, and not only that, but also wrong.

Universe means Everything. So yes you can point to anything and everything and say "this is universe". The ideal that there is something "outside, before, after" the universe, is what physicists and scientists conjecture about, hence the "Big Bang Theory" which is a postulation of "the beginning" of the universe.


The word "everything" only makes sense in relation to a finite set of elements. If there is no such a relation, no such a set, then it makes no sense.

The universe isn't such a set. Personal experience, however, is. The word "universe" does include personal experience but it goes beyond it. It includes not only what is known (and what can be enumerated) but also what is unknown (what cannot be enumerated.)

You can say "everything from my personal experience" or "everything I know".
These are legit statements.

You cannot, however, say "everything that exists" or "everything unnkown".
Because there is no set that contains everything that exists and everything that is unknown.

You can point with your finger and say "this is a tree!" and "this is not a tree!" You cannot, however, point with your finger and say "this is universe!" and "this is not universe!" You might be able to say "this is part of the universe!" but then you wouldn't be able to say "this is not part of the universe!"

You should know this by now. This is elementary quality, common sense, knowledge. That you don't know this, or are feigning ignorance, will make me and everybody else lose what little respect there can be, for your intellect. I can only hope at this point that you're playing the fool. Or you are a fool. Either way these lessons on causality are a bargain for you.


I don't need your respect, moron.

What you're saying is common sense, I agree. And the reason it is common sense is precisely the reason why you should have assumed that I know and understand what you're saying.

It's not that I don't understand your banalities.
It's that you do not understand what I am saying.

You are quite simply CONFUSED by my statements.
And instead of trying to understand them you are simply projecting this confusion onto me.
It's a classical tactic.

Infinity is a process of change, hence it is always demonstrated.


Change certainly isn't infinity.
Change can be roughly defined as a difference between two successive states in time.
It is a special case of difference, which is a type of relation between two data points.

You can't understand the observation that just because doesn't identify the cause to an event, doesn't mean the event has no cause.


I understand that, moron. It is you who does not understand that just because you are searching for causes does not mean you will ever find them

You're a broken record, my friend.

That's also why you are solipsistic.


Yes, that's why I am a solipsist -- in your fantasies. Because you are hallucinating that I do not understand that just because I see no causes does not mean that further research won't reveal them.

To claim that events "have no cause" is absurd, which is to say, you're ignoring whatever causes that led to the event anyway.


Whatever, my friend.

He [Bertrand Russell] would agree with me.


No, he won't. He would agree with me.
He would agree you're autistic.

Here's a quote from him:

[I]t will not be assumed that eaery event has some
antecedent which is its cause in this sense; we shall only believe in causal
sequences where we find them, without any presumption that they always
are to be found.


If you cannot defend your assertion about "uncaused events", then it is mysticism, the same as 'god' or divinity.


You are saying it's up to me to defend the obvious (that there are events for which we see no cause) against what is not obvious (that there are causes even when we don't see them.)

Go ahead and explain yourself. You already did. "I don't know the cause of this or that event, therefore, it has no cause." That is retarded. You seem to be an irrational person.


"I don't know the God who created humans, therefore, humans are not created by God".
You're saying this is retarded.
Good stuff.

It's about speaking for yourself. If you need dead philosophers to argue on your behalf then that's your problem.


It appears me that not even dead philosophers can help me convince retards.

I probably know more about what Bertrand Russel wrote, and meant, than you do. So it's a moot point. His critical points were/are about how logic is tied up to language mechanics and how people communicate limits what they can relay about logic and rationality.


You know jackshit.

What a cop-out. You obviously have limits when attempting to understand things, and this topic particularly. If nothing else then you should learn about limits to knowledge, Epistemology. You are the subjectivist to imply, repeatedly, that "because we don't know something" then it must not exist.


You're routinely misinterpreting what I am saying.
This is why discussing anything with you is futile.

For example, I never said that becaues we don't know something that it must not exist.
I simply said that any word that refers to something we don't know is meaningless.
There's a HUGE difference between the two statements.
But you simply don't understand them.

I don't cling to dead, nor living, authorities. Philosophy is about becoming your own authority, concerning the essential qualities of life and existence.

It's about speaking for yourself. If you need dead philosophers to argue on your behalf then that's your problem.


You are posturing.
Your statements are quite simply wrong.
That's the only thing that matters.
As for who's more creative, I am pretty sure it's not you.
You present no discoveries regarding the previously unknown.
You repeat what many other naive people repeat.

See how you cleverly insert "God" into the analogy???


I do because you're a believer.
The word God refers to a mechanism that governs the universe.
In other words, it refers to someone or something that determines the fate of everything that exists.
It's the belief that the universe is ordered.
Does not matter if this mechanism is sentient or not.

I am not interested in what you think you are.
I am only interested in what you really are.
And you really are a believer.

What I am saying is that human knowledge, wisdom, experience, any given perspective, an individual, has limits.


That's not what you are doing.
What you are doing is you are saying that causes exist even when we don't see them.

You are quite simply CONFUSED.

People have blind-spots in vision. Just because you don't see something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That's you position, Solipsism.


My position is that you're a retard . . . who is incapable of understanding other people's positions.

What you say is my position is NOT my position.
That is your MISINTERPRETATION.

When you set out to explore reality, fuckface, what happens is you end up expanding your experience. In other words, you end up collecting evidence.

You are so stupid you cannot make a difference between collecting evidence and finding causes.

Fuckface, when you go out to collect some evidence the content of that evidence would be as it is independently from what you want it to be. Do you understand this? That means that there might not be any causal relations at all. Causal relations are CONTAINED WITHIN evidence. They are not transcendent or precedent. They are either there or they are not.

You are quite simply dumb.
That's what you are.
It's hilarious.

You are deciding IN ADVANCE what evidence you are going to collect.
You do not let evidence be what it is.
No, you decide that it must have certain form.
You decide that it must reveal causal relations.
THAT is solipsism, fuckface.

I am not against exploring reality, fuckface.
I am against DIRECTED exploration of reality.
That's what Christians do.
They look for evidence that will prove the existence of something they have previously imagined.
That's what you're doing, fuckface.
You decide in advance there are causal relations and then you set out to find them.
Because they MUST be somewhere.
Just because you say so.

What I'm saying, about the unseen and unknown, is that it must follow the rules and natural law to which humanity has axioms, insofar as those axioms have held true historically, and they have.


What you're saying is that the universe must be the way you want it to be.
It is not allowed to be the way it wants to be.
No, everything must fit your expectations.

That IS solipsism, my friend.
To think that something MUST happen simply because you predicted it with 100% certainty.
You are so stupid you think that your predictions CREATE reality.

It's not "dependent upon my experience" or "your experience".


Fuckface, the content of our sensory experience is not dependent on our sensory experience. That is EXACTLY what I've been telling you all long. The content of sensory experience can be ANYTHING. In other words, sensory information can take ANY FORM. This means it can be ordered (compressible) or chaotic (incompressible.) It's up to the universe. But our models of reality, which themselves are part of our sensory experience, are dependent upon certain parts of sensory experience. That is if they are grounded in reality. It is actually YOU who are saying that sensory experience must have a specific form i.e. that it must be ordered. You are the one saying that if the gravity on Earth has been 9.8 m/s^2 for who knows how many years in the past that it cannot suddenly change tommorrow. You ARE the solipsist, fuckface. You and also James who thinks that the universe flows i.e. that there are no discontinuties.

You are an obvious novice in philosophy when you admit ignorance about scientific essentials.


I am pretty sure I am whatever you say I am.
And you are the next great philosopher.
Alongside James S. Saint who is the only sane Homo Sapian.

You have a long, long way to go, before talking about concepts that you barely know an ounce about.


You posture too much.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3553
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Magnus Anderson » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:59 pm

Seren wrote:Existence itself implies nonexistence.


Strictly analytically, existence refers to one of the following things:

1. to what was experienced in the past
2. to predictions that we consider to be correct (or if you want to be strict, you can say to predictions that can be inferred from our past observations)

Non-existence, on the other hand, refers to predictions that we consider to be incorrect.

And that's all these words mean.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3553
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:16 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:Pi isn't random.

Yes, it is.


Magnus Anderson wrote:It's a computable number.
But the great majority of real numbers are uncomputable.

The same applies to bit strings.
Most bit strings are incompressible.

What this means, in plain terms, is that order is an exception.
It's not the rule (the way shelterted people, such as you, think.)

You might want to look into algorithmic information theory. Very good stuff. Far deeper than anything you have to say. Most of what you say, anyways, is quite simply banal, and not only that, but also wrong.

All you're reaffirming now is that you can't listen. Incomprehensible to you does not impossible to everybody and everything. Computers can calculate what you, or I, cannot. Thus my point stands.


Magnus Anderson wrote:The word "everything" only makes sense in relation to a finite set of elements. If there is no such a relation, no such a set, then it makes no sense.

The universe isn't such a set. Personal experience, however, is. The word "universe" does include personal experience but it goes beyond it. It includes not only what is known (and what can be enumerated) but also what is unknown (what cannot be enumerated.)

You can say "everything from my personal experience" or "everything I know".
These are legit statements.

You cannot, however, say "everything that exists" or "everything unnkown".
Because there is no set that contains everything that exists and everything that is unknown.

The universe includes all sets, all that is known, all that is unknown.


Magnus Anderson wrote:I don't need your respect, moron.

Good because you don't have it, petulant child. It is a task to break through your solipsistic, autistic bubble though. I may as well do it, or, reality will pop your bubble for me, either way is fine.


Magnus Anderson wrote:Change certainly isn't infinity.
Change can be roughly defined as a difference between two successive states in time.
It is a special case of difference, which is a type of relation between two data points.

I said that infinity is a process of change, not that change is infinite. This must be another of your reading mistakes.


Magnus Anderson wrote:No, he won't. He would agree with me.
He would agree you're autistic.

Here's a quote from him:

It will not be assumed that eaery event has some
antecedent which is its cause in this sense; we shall only believe in causal
sequences where we find them, without any presumption that they always
are to be found.

And what does "in this sense" mean, context is required. You are quoting Russel out of context.

Humans obviously make mistakes in causation. Children, like you, believe Santa Clause is real. Thus they believe, falsely, that receiving presents on Christmas is caused by Santa Clause. That's irrational, when premises are false. I've already covered this on the topic of "external versus internal causes". You keep skipping over that, because you're here to argue for the sake of arguing. You've already lost the point, long ago.


Magnus Anderson wrote:"I don't know the God who created humans, therefore, humans are not created by God".
You're saying this is retarded.
Good stuff.

You're the one bringing mysticism into the conversation as a strawman argument and red herring fallacy.

What I mentioned about gods and abrahamism is that most people, humanity, christians, jews, moslems, you, all associate "First Cause", Causa Sui, to gods, for specific reason and cause. You obviously have no explanations nor deep knowledge about causality. Basically, people seek reasons/causes throughout life. When they/you cannot find them, then people use reasonability and rationality, estimation, guessing, prediction, and even mysticism. Solipsists like you go further.

You believe that "if I cannot know, then nobody must know!" This is flagrantly false and why you need to give up your points.

My argument, in response to you is, provide evidence, or even reasoning, for your hypothetical "uncaused event". What do you mean, other than randomness, or what you personally cannot comprehend or explain? And just because something appears random to one person, doesn't make it so to everybody else.


Magnus Anderson wrote:It appears me that not even dead philosophers can help me convince retards.

That's humorous because your dead philosophers don't side with you.


Magnus Anderson wrote:You're routinely misinterpreting what I am saying.
This is why discussing anything with you is futile.

For example, I never said that becaues we don't know something that it must not exist.
I simply said that any word that refers to something we don't know is meaningless.
There's a HUGE difference between the two statements.
But you simply don't understand them.

Another cop-out...


Magnus Anderson wrote:You are posturing.
Your statements are quite simply wrong.
That's the only thing that matters.
As for who's more creative, I am pretty sure it's not you.
You present no discoveries regarding the previously unknown.
You repeat what many other naive people repeat.

If this is what's left of your arguments and rationality then this exchange must be at an end.


Magnus Anderson wrote:You are quite simply CONFUSED.
you're a retard
fuckface
You are so stupid
Fuckface
You are quite simply dumb.
THAT is solipsism, fuckface.
I am not against exploring reality, fuckface.
That's what you're doing, fuckface.
Fuckface
You ARE the solipsist, fuckface.

I am right, it is at an end.

Throw your tantrum, petulant child. Maybe you'll learn after you calm down and realize the futility of your ignorance.

On the matter of unknown causes, there doesn't need to be anything mystical, religious, or abrahamic about it. Science investigates unknown causes all the time. It's an essential and common function of scientist. That you don't know this fact either, discredits you even further.

Moron.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:35 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:
Seren wrote:Existence itself implies nonexistence.


Strictly analytically, existence refers to one of the following things:

1. to what was experienced in the past
2. to predictions that we consider to be correct (or if you want to be strict, you can say to predictions that can be inferred from our past observations)

Non-existence, on the other hand, refers to predictions that we consider to be incorrect.

And that's all these words mean.

That's subjective existence and I agree with you on that, but I mean objective existence. In order for existence to exist, it would have to come from a state of nonexistence and it will return to a nonexistent state. But nonexistence doesn't mean a state of complete nothingness, but the polar opposite of what existence is.

“If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.” Tesla
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:40 am

Is PI random?

That's a good question. Hmm... well it has no repeating pattern, but it is determined. So I guess it depends on how one defines random.
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:16 am

"No repeating pattern" is chaos/randomness.

Most humans are solipsistic and believe that if something is not seen (the darkside of the moon) then it must not, or cannot, exist. Thus most humanity define existence according to experience and knowledge. "If you don't know something then it doesn't exist."

"If I close my eyes then all the bad things go away." That's about 95% of humanity.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Serendipper » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:40 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:"No repeating pattern" is chaos/randomness.

Most humans are solipsistic and believe that if something is not seen (the darkside of the moon) then it must not, or cannot, exist. Thus most humanity define existence according to experience and knowledge. "If you don't know something then it doesn't exist."

"If I close my eyes then all the bad things go away." That's about 95% of humanity.

That reminds me about hurricanes with female names being perceived as less dangerous. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/01/health/fe ... index.html

Therefore if we mandate all hurricane names be female, average IQ should rise over time ;)
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." Howard Aiken
Serendipper
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby surreptitious75 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:12 am

Seren wrote:
Anything x infinity is undefined according to math books

Anything x infinity is infinity according to math books but infinity itself is undefined as a specific quantity
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby surreptitious75 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:28 am

Seren wrote:
Is Pi random

well it has no repeating pattern but it is determined So I guess it depends on how one defines random

The sequence of pi may be random given that it is irrational but pi itself is not random
Since it occupies a specific place on the number line just like every other number does
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:11 am

A circle has infinite sides, and so Pi represents a derivative function of infinity, hence why it cannot be calculated.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Arcturus Descending » Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:34 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:A circle has infinite sides, and so Pi represents a derivative function of infinity, hence why it cannot be calculated.


Define sides here and not your typical side.
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14918
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:43 pm

You don't know what a side is? Do you know what a triangle is?

Google it or ask your Kindergarten teacher.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:04 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:
Seren wrote:
Anything x infinity is undefined according to math books

Anything x infinity is infinity according to math books but infinity itself is undefined as a specific quantity

Anything times an infinite is INFINITE, not "infinity". Infinity is not a number, quantity, or place. Infinity is merely a vague idea of something unimaginably large.

And "random" means "lacking any predictable pattern". So Pi, being predictable, is not random.
Last edited by James S Saint on Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25612
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby surreptitious75 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:05 pm

Urwron wrote:
A circle has infinite sides

A side is where two points meet but a circle does not have any points
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users