Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Armok]

On singularity:
http://yudkowsky.net/obsolete/singularity.html

I was afraid of bringing up the singularity before, as if I mention it in any way that relates to me personally it'll start a flamewar.

[Eidalac]

You don't know what evolution IS.

I think the OP got the important gist of it, things continuously improving over time.

True enough, but since the main point of the OT was that Evolution == God, I felt I had to use the technical meaning because that itself shows no such link.  Plus I just don't like it when people use the term incorrectly, so I tend to correct them even when it's not super vital to be correct.

To deny progress is to deny God? This is what I always considered. "Evolution" is not exactly the right word.

Well, not so much.  The idea of the Singularity just means that, when looking at a species that has passed that point we can only say that it's passed it, now how far past that point it is.

It's kinda like with a dorf Champion.  You know when it hits Legendary in a skill, but without a utility, you don't really know if it's just Legendary or +4 or what-not.  To a generic goblin, either is equally nightmarish.

In these cases, I think that Progress is a better word than evolution.

[x2yzh9]

So i remembered aobut something relevant to this, some scientists, i forget the university, developed a theory that the universe is a 'bounce', that the big bang was an explosion of all things in the 'old' universe compressing or being destroyed in the inward closing of the 'old' universe, exploding into an infinite mass or something, i might be getting off what it was, anyway they believe the universe was 'bounced', not simply created. I also think that one should have his own personell beliefs, anything could of happened, even if this universe was bounced, what created the universe before that, or before that? It is up to oneself to decide what YOU think created the universe, there is no definite understanding, only a theorom of what REALLY created the universe.

[Enzo]

Hmm, just for clarification, are you talking about the theory that the Universe contracts and expands in cycles? Like, after the universe has expanded (as it is currently doing) to a certain point, it begins to contract until it reduces to a single point of infinite mass, at which point the forces holding it together give up and another big bang occurs (repeating the cycle)? I think scientists are fond of that one, but the actual mechanics of the forces involved are mind boggling to me (yay astrophysics).

I don't see the connection to evolution exactly, but for some reason the line of thinking behind that theory appeals to me.

[Chutney]

The OP used the wrong term. They didn't mean evolution (well, maybe in their minds they did, but in context they didn't). They meant, as Pleeb said before, progress. The OP thought that eventually humans (or any other race) might get so advanced as to become a god-like entity, not really "wait millions of years for that ability to suddenly develop due to evolution".

This thread has minimum to do with evolution too, lol.

[Leafsnail]

It's difficult to say that species "improve" at all, really.  For instance, while human beings can walk around and have technology and stuff, this comes at the cost of breeding ability, and food consumption, and physical strength.  While human beings will almost certainly be gone or in serious decline in ~10,000 years, bacteria and simple insects will still be going strong.

[Andir]

what created the universe before that, or before that? It is up to oneself to decide what YOU think created the universe, there is no definite understanding, only a theorom of what REALLY created the universe.

Why does it have to be created.  Can't it just have existed forever?

[Leafsnail]

I suppose you could form a personal theory, but you'd have to accept it's not backed up by evidence in any way and therefore inferior to evidence based theories, I guess.

[Enzo]

I suppose you could form a personal theory, but you'd have to accept it's not backed up by evidence in any way and therefore inferior to evidence based theories, I guess.

Wait...there's evidence supporting time as finite? Because the entire universe being created out of nothing is equally as implausible as the universe having existed forever. Unless I'm missing something key here.

[Eidalac]

I suppose you could form a personal theory, but you'd have to accept it's not backed up by evidence in any way and therefore inferior to evidence based theories, I guess.

Wait...there's evidence supporting that time as finite? Because the entire universe being created out of nothing is equally as implausible as the universe having existed forever. Unless I'm missing something key here.

Kinda-sorta.

Either the Big Crunch (gravity eventually wins and a everything collapses into a singularity) or the Big Rip (gravity looses and dark energy eventually puts infinity+1 distance between all forms of energy) mean the end of space-time as we can understand it.

Either case at least implies the end of time, but since we have no math that can tell us what happens after those events, it may just be the end of our ability to understand time.

How much of a difference that makes is debatable.

[Ampersand]

Time is a number line with no negative numbers. To have any discussion about time before point 0 on the number line is ridiculous. In fact, due to the nature of the universe, talking about anything before 10^-44 seconds after the Big Bang is ridiculous. There can be no time without a universe simply because time is a function of the universe.

[Enzo]

Right, right, but we have nothing to prove that all matter was spontaneously created at the moment of the big bang, to my knowledge. The universe could well have existed before the big bang as an infinite mass singularity, and where did that come from?

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm saying the whole discussion is paradoxical. We have no idea where or if there was a beginning at all. Because, as far as we know, matter/energy cannot be created from nothingness under any conditions.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

The only constant is this:

Excreta Occurs.

[Ampersand]

I think I've devised a way to point out the major flaw many people seem to make when discussing evolution.

Below are four strings of letters, all containing the same letters in different arrangements. Arrange them in order from the Least Random string to the Most Random string. If any string is just as random as another, place them side by side.

1. Motorcycle,
2. Mtoeocrcly,
3. Ooyrmcctel,
4. Yrmletcoco.

Below, the answer. Don't look until you've tried.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1, 2, 3 and 4 are all equally likely arrangements of the given string of letters.

[Armok]

possibilities presented in this thread:
* time has at one point started, before this, reality did not exist, after this, reality existed.
* time goes back into the past infinity, and reality has always existed.

Possibilities not presented (until this post):
* cyclic time, whit reality existing at any point in the cycle
* reality never/dosn't exist in any way, and time is an illusion if even that.
* time has a complex, probably fractal structure, and the truth value of "the universe exists" at any point in this fractal is some complex state between true and false that probably also has fractal characteristics.
* [insert technobabble only understandable by a legendary mathematician]
* the nature of reality and time are perfectly well defined and simple, well within the grasp of finite intelligence, but the finite intelligence is still a few hundred times that of any human.