What I just said. — Jackson

That Im inarticulate?

You are saying nothing and are very inarticulate. — Jackson

Then what do you see?

Do you?

Not to posit yourself opposite to nature.

To act naturally, in agreement with nature. Agreement is gone nowadays.

Humans are not natural? — Jackson

No. They act unnatural. Against the natural eternal objective moral. Which is fine by me but no good.

This question is a variant, or a sub, of the question if there exists an objective reality.

What other morality is there? — Jackson

Natural morality.

Yes, as I've noted before. — T Clark

You should ad that it's nonsense. Gods don't need anything to precede them. But maybe heaven is made of it.

Capra is another one who doesn't know his metaphysics from his physics. Reading "Tao of Physics" was the first time I remember recognizing that — T Clark

He even has his physics not right..

Well, the Gibbs free energy increases. And mass is equivalent to energy. The amount is tiny though. And it depends on how the info is stored.

Information is everywhere. — Harry Hindu

Only in computers (a great part of which is metadata) , books, signs, roads, airplanes, schoolboards, or commercials (so pretty much anywhere!). There is no information inherent in nature. Information is always about something we define. A wavefunction contains no information, neither is there an "it from bit" computed beneath and displayed as matter.

I said that weight is the relation between your phone's mass and the force of gravity on surface of the Earth. How does writing scribbles on this screen change that relation? — Harry Hindu

Paradoxically it may sound, but a phone with information on it actually weighs more than without.

If there is no way for us to know that we are in a simulation as opposed to what we call reality, then they are the same thing. — T Clark

The dream seems pretty real. But it's not. So the the perfect simulation is not the same thing.

Ipecacuanha may refer to:

a synonym of Psychotria, a genus of flowering plants in the family Rubiaceaethe common name of Carapichea ipecacuanha, a species of flowering plant in the family Rubiaceae, whose roots were used to make syrup of ipecaca fictional ship in H. G. Wells's The Island of Doctor Moreau

Isn't information just some material stuff we can use to inform each other? Something with no inherent material existence in nature? — Hillary

For example, imagine a computer memory chip. Say we have assigned color at certain combinations of ones and zeroes. And say we associate with each color a coordinate on a plane. Also in the form of ones and zeroes. With this information we can construct a picture in color. Black and white takes less info. If we want many details more. If we want a picture adequate to sub atomic level, we need a lot of info.

But how we know what the zeroes and ones stand for? We know because we give the info meaning. And meaning has weight! Literally! A memory chip with meaningful information weighs more than one without.

There are things far more important than truth? :chin:
— Agent Smith

What nonsense!

:snicker: — Agent Smith

:lol:

You're the best!

Yes. That's why it's strange that the masturbating of dear Diogenes (Deedee, for insider friends) is not accepted, while that of Alexander was regarded as most admirable. And Alexander had a far greater reach even! Likewise, in modern science, scientists masturbating thinking about knowledge to be gained are highly esteemed.

That's what Diogenes told Alexander the great, who was an admirer. He came to Diogenes' amphora home to ask him things. "Dear Alexander, please! You putting me in the shade!". Alexander said that if he wasn't Alexander he wanted to be Diogenes. Diogenes said that if was someone else he wanted to be Diogenes. Typical...

No! :lol:

Other people? What other people? :snicker: — Agent Smith

:lol:

"Alexander, please! You block my Sun!"

:lol:

You claim you can blow all these physics guys away but where are your links that demonstrate debates you have had with physicists? — universeness

The question of proof again... :lol:

Yeah, say again! The world has never seen the contemporary slave level before. No comparison...

The worker is given artificial factory food (leading to disease, of which the "health insurance"(!) and pharmaceutical corporates, using the same loan slaves) profit), a cheap prefabricated housing, if money is left, an occasional artificial entertainment, an even rarer occasion to escape hell for a week in a plane which always returns, and a tiny chance to live a life like the ruling slavemasters, the possessing class. Long live the Revolution! Crush the state!

Maybe, just maybe, Truth = Good = Beauty. They're the same thing?! — Agent Smith

My neighbor is an ugly little bald-headed self-righteous SOB, spreading lies behind your back and pretending. That's the ugly truth. Dunno what's he good for. Then again, he's only human.

The True, the Bad, and the Ugly. A holey trinity?

Yeah! Sorry, my wild shots (in the dark) has found an unintended victim it seems. :grin: — Agent Smith

Keep on shooting AS. But please turn on the light!

Isn't information just some material stuff we can use to inform each other? Something with no inherent material existence in nature? The surface of a black hole contains information of the stuff inside, the maximum quantity even, but what does that mean?

There is a similar thread: What is information?, started up by the unforgettable @Pop.

Tao is a whirling emptiness (ch'ung),
Yet (erh) in use (yung) is inexhaustible (ying).
Fathomless (yuan),
It seems to be the ancestor (tsung) of ten thousand beings.
It blunts the sharp,
Unties the entangled,
Harmonizes the bright,
Mixes the dust.
Dark (chan),
It seems perhaps to exist (ts'un).
I do not know whose child it is,
It is an image (hsiang) of what precedes God (Ti). — T Clark

Again, Lao must have had an instinct feeling for the nature of reality. All these poetic lines, except the last nonsensical ones, show a truly striking similarity with quantum field theoretical considerations. Although not expressed in mathematical language, both descriptions certainly have a common. Aren't we all made from the quantum vacuum?

If the Tao precedes God, it also precedes the quantum vacuum and any higher dimensional structure.

Fritjof Capra was praised and criticized for his Tao of Physics. Lederman writer of the God particle (if the universe is the answer, then what'sthe question?) wrote it to be a book not needed, and Woit criticized it for not being updated with the developments. Chew's bootstraps (with which the Tao is compared), although left behind at that time (60's and 70's), recently gained in power again, which shows Capra was on the right track. I read only parts of the book, but find Bohm's holographic universe much more interesting. Capra's emphasis on inter-connectedness and the whole was very welcome and it deserves mention that Chew's bootstraps, developed in the physically roaring sixties, together with Regge theory forming non-perturbative approaches to S-matrix theory (in relation to QCD, analytic continuation, and sheaf cohomologies), after being killed by political power and new reductionist models, are recently reincarnated

Nostradamos wrote
Patriots by 10, nuff said
Put your bets down now — T Clark

:lol:

No doubt the DIMP guy and the Mobius strip/Klein bottle guy and probably a whole army of other individuals who think they know the true T.o.E would have a similar opinion of your posit to the one you hold of theirs. — universeness

Yes, but then they first have to understand what my theory is about, wont they? I know what their's is about, and lemme tellya, its woowoo, if you know about fundamental physics. Möbius strips, Klein bottles, and DIMP, have no place in the fundaments of physics. Well, a Möbius strip comes in handy for describing a spinor. It shows how he spinor rotates once after two spatial rotations, thats all. I blow these guys down the table in a minute... But hey, let them wallow in their woowoo: searchers for truth!

Entropy, both physical and Shannon's, are a quantitave measure of the load of raw information a system contains or is able to contain. Information in this case can be interpreted with data, zeroes and ones. Consider a volume of space. Bekenstein showed that the maximum load of information, of zeroes and ones, is a proportional to the bounding surface of the volume. The maximum is actually reached if the mass inside this volume reaches that of a black hole with a Schwarzschild radius of a sphere with the volume involved. The number of Planck-areas (10exp-70 square meter) on that surface can be compared with the number of zeroes and ones on a memory chip. A gas in a container can carry a pretty big number of ones and zeroes. But compare this with the number of ones and zeroes that potentially be contained in a spherical container with a surface of one square meter: 10exp70, which can only be reached if there is enough matter to form a black hole with a Schwarzschild radius of about 0.3 meter.

It's a different question what the actual information is about. The zeroes and ones in a computer are just a means to compare with an actuality that depends on what we give them as a load. Likewise, the maximum information on the surface of a black hole (which is temporary entangled with the inner matter to resolve the information paradox) doesn't mean nothing as long we don't know from what the hole was formed. The surfaces black hole made from a super massive bike and one of a giant rabbit with the same mass, contain the same amount of information, but its obvious that the two pieces of info point to kind of different objects, the bike and the rabbit.

Epicureanism is just an anally retentive hedonism. — baker

Dear mother of god... Is the the soothing pleasure of the gods-given Papaveraceae degraded to anal retention here?

My question is, does it really matter if morality is objective or subjective? I do not think so. — Jackson

I do think so. If you consider morality as objective, you can discern man-made morality as a mere illusion, a fiction, a fantasy, a false morality even. A morality which can be surpassed, not obeyed to. Every man-made moral is a moral to which you don't need to feel submitted to. An objective moral is one to which we all should conform. Which is not to say that the moral should be obeyed to. And of course, one's objective morality can be different from the other's. An objective morality gives a feeling of certainty.

brother Smith!
— Hillary

:snicker: — Agent Smith

I'm waving, brother Smith, like all of us wave. One moment the gods are there in their full eternal heavenly divinity, and the next I think, who ordered them? Wouldn't it be great if the universe was heaven? Without any gods? I can't understand where then where the universal matter came from. Yes, two universes eternally inflate into existence, pair after pair, on a higher dimensional virtual quantum vacuum bulk substrate, so beautifully described by Lao Tse, but where the fuck did that came from?

Your task is to bring into existence a universe from scratch! How would you do it? Wouldn't you first need info ( a how-to algorithm) to begin & complete your cosmic task? — Agent Smith

Great question brother Smith! Consider this. When the circumstances forced heavenly life into a collective research effort to invent particles and vacuum they got involved in a long long process. The initial enthusiasm turned into despair, but the rescue came very unexpectedly, from a most unusual god species... And then it was creation time. Heaven helt it's breath.

Yeah, a rather silly aspect.

Again, a theory that explains everything explains nothing, oui? — Agent Smith

A ToE has a deceiving name. It explains mechanisms at the fundaments only and it is wrongly thought that from this knowledge everything can be explained. The basic principles are know the.

That's a rationalization, not rationality. A rationalization is a plausible reason we invent to support a belief or desire, but is not necessarily rational. — Philosophim

Agreed, but faith can be rational if the theology is coherent.

The reason for my belief is a different reason gods had to create the stuff of the universe. That reason can be rational if science offers no further solace. If the cosmology incorporates all eras of cosmic evolution, what causes are left if not physical? Appearance out of the blue seems more irrational than creation by gods. How can something appear out of nothing?

One could use rationality to address faith as gods offer a reason for bringing the universe into existence.

Have you ever studied formal systems? — ArmChairPhilosopher

I have studied physics, which rather heavily relies on math. The laws of physics can't explain themselves. I adhere to a most parsimonious two particle model, without mass. My gods model is the opposite. The temporary material universe is just a reflection of the non-material eternal heaven. All life in the cosmos, every living creature in it, has a divine eternal god counterpart. So by knowing life and the universe you know gods and heaven. We wont go to it, but life our life, in endless variations, over and over, compatible with serial big bangs. Is there a moral? Yes. They are like our own, but some human gods "screwed up" during the preparations for creation. What they can't do in heaven, they tried to project unto the material universe, by secret tinkering with the particle properties... or initial conditions... but here Im not sure of ( :wink: ). But we should be careful with creation, the universal lives, if we have to draw a moral.

Lao Tzu was onto something i.e. his mind did know about whatever the hell quantum vacuum is.
— Agent Smith

[irony] Yes, and Nostradamos predicted the Patriots will win the Superbowl this season.[/irony — T Clark

AS is on to something! Lemme tellya!

As I see it, nature may scream sometimes, but briefly, then it stops. We should be like that. None of this whispering. Just be quiet. Say what needs to be said, then shut up. Do what needs to be done, then stop, leave it behind, and go on the whatever's next. — T Clark

Still, the soft whispering of Nature can be compared with the whirling emptiness of the quantum vacuum. Sift words, not yet fully fledged, ready to be firmly spoken when interaction is there, or measurement, or particles are pulled out of their virtual vacuum state into reality. Sometime with a primordial birth cry, which is a kind of dramatic particle physics... :fire: (whatever the fire means, but seems appropriate)

Okay, but the gods can be just like people or animals. Who says there is one Super Omni Monster God?