| JREF Homepage | Swift Blog | Events Calendar | $1 Million Paranormal Challenge | The Amaz!ng Meeting | Useful Links | Support Us |
![]() |
|
|
|
|||||||
| Notices |
| Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
|
|
#41 |
|
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Whithin earshot of the North Sea
Posts: 16,604
|
And, as usual, you are evading the main argument of this thread: Josh's #1 program, the deterministic version, shows that there is no cause and effect in a deterministic system, because it has all been preprogrammed. Since you claim this universe to be deterministic, how do you account for your additional claim that humans are responsible for their destiny (even for "the one" choice)? How about addressing that issue instead af bickering about random numbers?
Hans |
|
__________________
Don't. Just don't. |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 14,978
|
Thank you, Hans.
|
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
I am a fatalist remember. The Universe is acting Deterministically – JUST LIKE A COMPUTER PROGRAM!!!
Quote:
Are you seriously this retarded, or are you just running on autopilot now, mindlessly defending your dogmatic religion at all cost? |
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
That's just you to lazy or unable to trace the code ... nothing more. |
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Whithin earshot of the North Sea
Posts: 16,604
|
Quote:
Do I have to remind you that you have said:
Quote:
and:
Quote:
Quote:
How does this work in a deterministic, preprogrammed universe? Hans |
|
__________________
Don't. Just don't. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
A-Theist,
Quote:
You ever use the computer program MS Word? It’s a word processor, that is its Fate. MS Word doesn’t suddenly transform into the game QUAKE. In the same way that You don’t magically transform into a Cow.
Quote:
I am a Fatalist … all things are preordained. You are the one claiming that things happen magically and unlike a deterministic computer program. I am just waiting for you or Joshy to present some evidence for your ridiculous claim. … but I’m not holding my breath. I’ve been waiting over a Year for One single A-Theist to present some evidence for “free will”.
Quote:
You do remember me going on and on about you being nothing more than an MPB (Maximum Perceived Benefit) Algorithm? … and TLOP just being a superior, more complex, more elaborate, more intricate, faster, more efficient program … ? |
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 14,978
|
Franko...
If I did not choose my parents, they are still my parents nevertheless of course. However...since I did not choose them, can I be held responsible if they are criminals, or one of them is a deadbeat, or both of them gave me up for adoption, etc etc? Since I did not choose them, is it my fault who they are? |
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
Is that another example of your “free will” in action? … because I would call that Fate. But then again I don’t use one of those illogical A-Theist Dictionaries that Tricky (religious nutcase) swears by. |
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 14,978
|
Quote:
|
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 519
|
Franko,
Could you expand some more on your belief about fate? I am not asking to make fun of you, I'm really interested. The whole concept of fate has confused me my entire life. I like to hear what other peoples views are. Oh, and to be completely honest, most of this forum is over my head. I'm not good at debate. I have come here to learn. I enjoy reading (that which I can understand) because as I get older I realize I have no foundation of belief. I am not really an atheist. I don't know what I am, or what I will become. People here have a head start and more intellect than I do. But back to fate . . . |
|
__________________
Julia |
|
|
|
|
|
#51 |
|
Briefly immortal
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Group W bench
Posts: 42,404
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Hey Julia!
Quote:
A Fatalist believes that all things happen for a logical reason. There is no magic, just cause and effect, cause and effect, cause and effect. You had the “Big Bang”, and at that moment (or a moment before) there was an “Initial State” --an initial configuration of the Energy. Since that time everything has behaved in an entirely Deterministic (Logical, Objective) fashion, including the behavior of You and Me. Essentially we are observers.
Quote:
And in my experience complicated things are really just a whole lot of simple things appended together. Nothing about reality is beyond the grasp of the average human being.
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Whithin earshot of the North Sea
Posts: 16,604
|
Quote:
Hans |
|
__________________
Don't. Just don't. |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 14,978
|
Quote:
|
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 14,978
|
Quote:
|
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
Quote:
Supposing that there is a God, does God similarly deserve some of the credit, and/or blame for your actions? After all, if she didn’t put you in this reality, would you have done ANY of those things at all? Of course are you going to bitch to God for being born if you don’t like the hand you were dealt? How is God responsible for your hand? You had that hand when She found you. Besides, if life here is so unbearable … you know where the exit is. How is You not leaving when you want Her fault? Like I said Joshua, you are an A-Theist. You don’t want to accept responsibility for your own actions. You want to live a consequence free existence. That’s why you like to believe you have magic “guilt-free (willy)” powers. Don’t think that you-know-who isn’t watching and paying very careful attention. |
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Skepticifimisticalationist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 14,978
|
Why do you keep trying to avoid the question by changing it? Simple question: Since I did not choose my parents, is it my responsibility who they are? I'm not talking about things I have a CHOICE over, such as whether to attempt a terrorist bombing. Let's say I was conceived out of wedlock, for example, or due to unprotected sex. That action, committed by my parents, had direct consequences on my, certainly - I was born, after all - but am I responsible for them having unprotected sex? Would it be my fault if I was born out of wedlock?
Quote:
No matter how I try to simplify it, it goes over your head. Either you are unable to respond, or unwilling to respond. Let's try again:Listen, I believe everyone is responsible for their own actions. That's WHY I don't believe the universe is absolutely deterministic. If the universe is deterministic, as you contend, and if I am just a program doing what I was programmed to do, as you contend, then am I responsible for what the Programmer designed me to do? If, indeed, the universe is deterministic, and I'm just doing what I'm programmed to do, and can't change or do anything else (because I have no will), then why doesn't the Goddess simply delete me right away, instead of running me? Is she hoping that I will "magically" IGNORE my program and become a paragon of virtue? If the universe is "deterministic", why can't she just look at my code and say "oh, Joshua was programmed to not believe in me, he is a bad program" and send me to the Cosmic Abyssal Recycling Bin immediately? See, let's say I'm just an algorithm, a peer-to-peer transfer protocol that some programmer designed so that people can share files over the internet - like WinMX or Kazaa. My job is simply that - to transer files. That's it - I have no control over what those files are, I just transfer them. Now, suppose the Programmer who wrote and installed me uses me to transfer Bad Things - like terrorist bomb plans, for example, or child pornography. Maybe being able to get such things is why he programmed me all along. It doesn't matter. I have no choice over what files I transfer - I couldn't stop it if I wanted to. I couldn't even "want" to stop it, because I have no will. What you are saying is that when my "cycle" is up, then the Goddess will look at me and say, "during your existence, you were used to transfer terrorist bomb plans and child pornography - therefore, you are a bad program and you will be deleted from the hard drive of the universe." There are problems with your version of the universe. The first problem is that the judgement ultimately doesn't matter to me - I'm a few lines of code and that's it. When I'm "exited" and "uninstalled", nothing can possibly matter to me any longer, because I am no longer running. So the purpose of "judgement" in your universe is an unnecessary (and therefore illogical) extravagance. But the second, and most obvious, problem is that your universe blames the tool used to commit the crime rather than the evil Programmer who actually committed it. Why doesn't the Goddess ever get pissed at the "Progenitor/Initial/Lead/Solipsist/Programmer" for writing such effed-up program/gravitons? Imagine what it would be like if the FBI, when it finds a child pornographer, puts the file-transer program on trial and sentences it to be "deleted" instead of arresting the criminal himself. That's the universe you present, Franko. Now, before you have a seizure, you need to remember that the purpose of this thread isn't to prove whether "God" exists or doesn't. It isn't to "prove" whether the universe is deterministic or purely random, allowing for free will. The universe may very well be deterministic, Franko. The sole purpose of this thread is to prove that a universe can be predetermined, or can be personal-responsibility based, but can't be both at the same time. The two types of universes are mutually exclusive. And yes, God (or Goddess) can exist in either one. It seems to me that you think your explanation of the universe is the only one in which God can exist, therefore to disprove your explanation is to disprove the existence of God. It's not true - I've done nothing to disprove the existence of God. You say you don't believe that the two are mutually exclusive - but those two programs I wrote at the very beginning of the thread prove that they are mutually exclusive. Of course, you admittedly started saying that I was wrong immediately without even reading the programs! Who is the one who already had his mind made up? No matter how much you say I'm wrong, the programs are there for all to see, and they won't go away. Rather than long strings of convoluted arguments, those two programs are physical, repeatable, and direct evidence that I'm right. They work, and if you would actually look at them, you'd see too that they prove exactly what I say they prove. But you won't examine them. Are you afraid of what they might show you? |
|
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Joshua,
Quote:
Of course since you have a kindergarteners understanding of Determinism I don’t expect any of this to make much sense to you. ![]()
Quote:
I’ve told you many times that I do not believe that the LG created you. She may have modified your algorithm (greatly improved it), but She didn’t write it. She didn’t create YOU.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In reality the electron is NOT teleporting to the new shell magically. In reality it is moving there in a fairly “normal” manner, except this happens so quickly relative to our sense of time that it appears to happen instantaneously. The same thing is happening with You here. This Universe is not a True eternity. It is simply a transition zone between two shells (real universes).
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I was only following orders works sometimes, but for the most part you should have known better. Rest assured when anyone uses this defense at their judgment day they are always asked Who’s orders were you following? and that guy gets it 10x as bad.
Quote:
Quote:
What purpose do Nuclear weapons serve Josh? Should every family have a Nuclear weapon in their basement – “just in case”?
Quote:
![]()
Quote:
You need to familiarize yourself with the concept of Determinism. What you are saying above is the equivalent to 2 + 2 = 3.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But I have never claimed that the LG wrote your program, and I have stated that She didn’t more times then I can count. I don’t think you really care though because I happen to believe you are simply an A-Theist who took a thrashing from me, and then created a sock-puppet (Joshua Korosi) who pretends to be a “Deist” while he goes out of his way to dogmatically assert the sacred beliefs of the Cult of Pessimism (A-Theism).
Quote:
You don’t understand squat about Logical Deism, yet (according to you) you have already determined that it is FALSE. You sound just like any other A-Theist who believes that NO EVIDENCE means FALSE just because he wants it to. (unless it’s no evidence for “free will” in which case NO EVIDENCE means TRUE just because he wants it too).
Quote:
Don’t you remember? TLOP (GOD) makes/controls YOU makes/controls CAR |
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Well of COURSE it's not a computer program!
It's a VCR tape. After carefully hand crafting and animating every atom in the universe like a stop-action cartoon for nearly an eternity, god(dess) just sits there like an autistic toddler watching it over and over. |
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Demonstrate why having infinite (perfect and immutable) read only memory that's accessed in a predetermined manner would produce different results from the predictable universe you describe.
(And of course "god"(dess) can have infinite read only memory. It's got lots of other impossible baggage. Just throw the infinite bank of ROM into a box and pop it into the cosmic VCR.) |
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
evildave,
Quote:
Do you know anything today that you didn’t know yesterday? Do you know anything today that you didn’t know ten years ago? If you answered YES, then I’d say there is empirical evidence you (and the universe) are more than ROM.
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The ROM only maintained the *illusion* of additional experience beteen the image of the universe of a day ago, and the image of the universe today.
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
Atheist = A-Theist = A Theist = One Theist (God) |
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
If it's all immutably pre-determined, then it can be represented as one big read-only image.
Solipsism only claims that it's all in some big psycho's head. It does not necessarily make claims of determinism, one way or another. Though I suspeve a solipsistic universe run by a psycho-'goddess' to train gravitons would be far from deterministic. The following code sample illustrates how (if the tables represented all values representable in the universe), the reults of all operations could be a table lookup. This over-simplifies a bit. But the idea is that whatever you plug in for these predictable outcomes, the output is the predicted outcome. The state of the entire universe, including all of your current notions for this picosecond is at address 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000 The state of the entire universe, including all of your current notions for the next picosecond is at address 0x000000000000000000000000000000000001 A counter is simply being strobed to make it all work. Or the ROM is not built for random access (which saves a lot of logic on any masking), but for only sequential access (like a tape). The result of each strobe is dumped on the cosmic address bus to light (or not light) subatomic-size elements. To make this perfectly clear (at least to everyone besides Franko) It's not my belief, it's my model of why the 'totally deterministic' universe notion is dumb, and essentially makes the claim that the universe is a tape in a VCR. I would suspect that anyone who did know a little about how computers actually work would understand this allusion to illusion. Code:
#include < stdio.h >
#include < stdlib.h >
void help(void)
{
printf( "MathDemo number operator number\nDemonstrates simplistic table-driven math\n" );
printf( "\t Supports numbers between 0 and 3\n\tOperators: +, -, *, /\n" );
exit(1);
}
int main( int argc, const char** argv )
{
int first, second, result;
char op;
if( argc != 4 )
help();
first = atoi(argv[1]);
op = *argv[2];
second = atoi(argv[3]);
if( first < 0 || first > 3 || second < 0 || second > 3 )
help();
switch( op )
{
case '+':
{
static const int tab[4][4] =
{
{ 0, 1, 2, 3 },
{ 1, 2, 3, 4 },
{ 2, 3, 4, 5 },
{ 3, 4, 5, 6 },
};
result = tab[first][second];
}
break;
case '-':
{
static const int tab[4][4] =
{
{ 0, -1, -2, -3 },
{ 1, 0, -1, -2 },
{ 2, 1, 0, -1 },
{ 3, 2, 1, 0 },
};
result = tab[first][second];
}
break;
case '*':
{
static const int tab[4][4] =
{
{ 0, 0, 0, 0 },
{ 0, 1, 2, 3 },
{ 0, 2, 4, 6 },
{ 0, 3, 6, 9 },
};
result = tab[first][second];
}
break;
case '/':
{
// Division rounds to int, but you could make these tables 'float', and the outcomes would work
static const int tab[4][4] =
{
{ 0, 0, 0, 0 },
{ 0, 1, 0, 0 },
{ 0, 2, 1, 0 },
{ 0, 3, 1, 1 },
};
result = tab[first][second];
}
break;
default:
help();
}
printf( "%d %c %d = %d\n", first, op, second, result );
return 0;
}
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
… and you call yourself a Poogranner! |
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
MaterialistPatriotic AgnosticSocialistNaieve Saskatchewanian RadicalCanuckistani
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,377
|
Frankie, Frankie, Frankie,
why do you always have to go around saying that we have no free will BUT we have to suffer the consequences. Maybe you should plan out what you believe and what you will preach for others, so that you don't contradict yourself as often. P.S. Your not convincing anyone here because we are skeptics, not because we are all Athiests.
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
Pleeease! … ![]() Why don’t you hop back to Infidels.org, or at least dash back over to the Banter section, and leave the grown-ups to have their “grown-up talk”. That’s it … run along little girl … |
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,338
|
Quote:
But you don't have a point to make evildave. The only point you are making is My point. And My point is that YOU are nothing more than an A-Theist Troll, who is deeply devoted to his religious dogma, but doesn't really have anything to say about it, no points to make, no evidence to support it ... But you are going to holler and whine like a religious fanatic that it is the "one true faith" regardless of these facts. [evildave -- desperate fanatic mode/on] |
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Cool, I'm watching 'Back to the Future', and my quote of your post preceeds Franko's post.
|
|
|
|
|
#76 |
|
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,553
|
Quote:
Unless.... EvilDave is the Messias!!! Look, EvilDave. Praise the Lord
|
|
__________________
Stupid is depressing... ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
And of course we have further evidence conveniently dropped in our laps relevent to poking little holes in Franko's assertion that "computers are absolutely deterministic".
Real time inputs, bugs, glitches. Somebody will have fun trying to reproduce this one. So, was it "predetermined" that the software would hiccup just for me? My, don't I feel privileged. |
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Terrestrial Intelligence
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,676
|
I think there is some confusement here that 'predetermined' somehow means the same as 'preprogrammed'. This is not true. It is possible to make a computer program that does things that are not programmed into it but that are still the inevitable result of it running.
Imagine a very simple universe: a huge plain that contains of nothing but red and white tiles. The only things 'living' there are robotic ants that deterministically follow a very simple program: IF I'm on a RED TILE TURN 90 degrees LEFT WALK FORWARD to next tile IF I'm on a WHITE TILE TURN 90 degrees RIGHT WALK FORWARD to next tile The ants have no free will, they cannot decide to do it any other way. They blindy follow their TLOP. There is another rule in this universe: IF an ant stood on a RED TILE it will TURN WHITE IF an ant stood on a WHITE TILE it will TURN RED This means that the actions of the ants have an influence on their surrounding! Even though the things that will happen as a result of this deterministic universe are not preprogrammed, they are still inevitable since there is no room for chance in the TLOP in this universe. It is even impossible to predict exactly what will happen, without running the program of this universe: the only way to predict what will happen is tracing step by step every step of the ants, basically running the program in your head. Everything is predetermined (impossible to happen any other way) but not preprogrammed (planned out by the programmer). Some of you probably already know that I'm talking about the world famous Langton Ants. You can experiment with them with several JAVA programs you can find on the web, or you can just use my program. Not in fancy-schmancy C, but just in down to earth QBasic: you can find it on your Windows CD or in %windir%\COMMAND directory. Just copy the program below and paste it in Notepad. Save it as LANGTON.TXT, then rename it to LANGTON.BAS (QBasic is a DOS program so pasting the program directly into it is a bit difficult.) Start QBasic and use the OPEN menu to OPEN the LANGTON.BAS program and press F5 to start. Code:
DECLARE SUB Checker ()
DECLARE SUB Polka ()
DECLARE SUB TwinDot ()
DECLARE SUB Spot ()
SCREEN 12
CONST MaxX = 639: CONST MaxY = 479
INPUT "Number of 'Ants':", a
PRINT " 1 - Red"
PRINT " 2 - White"
PRINT " 3 - Checker"
PRINT " 4 - Polka Dot"
PRINT " 5 - TwinDot"
PRINT " 6 - Spot"
INPUT "Choose background:", b
DIM x(a): DIM y(a): DIM d(a)
FOR n = 1 TO UBOUND(x)
x(n) = INT(RND * (MaxX + 1)): y(n) = INT(RND * (MaxY + 1)): d(n) = INT(RND * 4) + 1
NEXT
SELECT CASE b
CASE 1: LINE (0, 0)-(MaxX, MaxY), 4, BF
CASE 2: LINE (0, 0)-(MaxX, MaxY), 15, BF
CASE 3: Checker
CASE 4: Polka
CASE 5: TwinDot
CASE 6: Spot
END SELECT
DO
FOR n = 1 TO UBOUND(x)
SELECT CASE POINT(x(n), y(n))
CASE 15: PSET (x(n), y(n)), 4
d(n) = d(n) + 1: IF d(n) > 4 THEN d(n) = 1
CASE 4: PSET (x(n), y(n)), 15
d(n) = d(n) - 1: IF d(n) < 1 THEN d(n) = 4
END SELECT
x(n) = x(n) - (d(n) = 2) + (d(n) = 4): y(n) = y(n) - (d(n) = 3) + (d(n) = 1)
IF x(n) > MaxX THEN x(n) = 0
IF x(n) < 0 THEN x(n) = MaxX
IF y(n) > MaxY THEN y(n) = 0
IF y(n) < 0 THEN y(n) = MaxY
NEXT
LOOP UNTIL INKEY$ = CHR$(27)
SCREEN 0: WIDTH 80,25
SUB Checker
FOR n = 0 TO MaxY STEP 2
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 2: PSET (m, n), 15: PSET (m + 1, n), 4: NEXT
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 2: PSET (m, n + 1), 4: PSET (m + 1, n + 1), 15: NEXT
NEXT
END SUB
SUB Polka
LINE (0, 0)-(MaxX, MaxY), 15, BF
FOR n = 0 TO MaxY STEP 4
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 4: PSET (m, n), 15: PSET (m + 2, n), 4: NEXT
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 4: PSET (m, n + 2), 4: PSET (m + 2, n + 2), 15: NEXT
NEXT
END SUB
SUB Spot
LINE (0, 0)-(MaxX, MaxY), 15, BF
FOR n = 0 TO MaxY STEP 4
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 4: PSET (m, n), 15: PSET (m + 1, n), 4: NEXT
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 4: PSET (m, n + 1), 4: PSET (m + 1, n + 1), 15: NEXT
NEXT
END SUB
SUB TwinDot
LINE (0, 0)-(MaxX, MaxY), 15, BF
FOR n = 0 TO MaxY STEP 3
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 3: PSET (m, n), 15: PSET (m + 1, n), 4: NEXT
FOR m = 0 TO MaxX STEP 3: PSET (m, n + 1), 4: PSET (m + 1, n + 1), 15: NEXT
NEXT
END SUB
You will see that the ants appear to randomly run around at first. (Okay, you don't see the ants, only the tiles they change in colour) But they are not! Only their starting coordinates are 'randomly' chosen. Everthing else is just their rigid programs unfolding. But suddenly out of the blue it appears as if they invented something new! They begin making large tube structures that can reach to the ends of the screen and beyond. They are only stopped when they encounter the works of the other ant which makes them turn back and destroy what they just made until they end up with what they had when their universe first began: the start of the program). But they don't stop there: they simply appear to go back to a past before that and start making other structures until they hit eachother works again and go in reverse once more. This universe with these two ants seems to have no time: everything happens once in one direction, once in the other and then back again. Even the starting point has no special meaning: it is just one state in an endless string of different states. If you want to see a demonstration of the complexity these ants can create, choose one of the dotted backgrounds with two ants. They will create complex patterns that keep changing for minutes (depending on your computer of course), then they start cleaning everything up, make something new and clean that up to start all over again. Remember: the patterns are not designed in advance and the ants have no memory of them. If you choose 1 ant in the beginning it will behave a bit differently: it too can create complex patterns, however it will not clean it up. The pattern keeps changing forever eventually creating a mess that looks quite random. Although all the different patterns could theoretically be recorded in a 'videotape' fashion (saving the screen everytime the ant makes a move), this would require an infinitely long tape. If the universe is like this, having totally rigid 'natural laws' that cannot be deviated from than this is a good analogy, and it is deterministic: it cannot evolve in any other way. It does not mean that one thing cannot be the result of what went on previously, in fact everything IS deterministically the result of what went on previously. The end result will be the same everytime the universe restarts the same way, hence it is predetermined. Since it is not specifically programmed to produce a specific outcome, it is not pre-programmed. Something that is pre-programmed is pre-determined, but something pre-determined is not necessarily pre-programmed. However: if there is only the slightest bit of randomness introduced into such a universe, ours or the ants', the end result will not always be exactly the same everytime it is run, therefore it is not predetermined. No one can be sure today that there is nothing in the universe that is or isn't entirely deterministic. It is a philosophical question that cannot be answered. |
|
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that! Multatuli |
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Well, if you want the same demonstration, but easier to find and more largely studied, there's always "life", and the same sorts of web searches that turn up ants will turn that up. "Life" can be randomly seeded, and it will generally turn out stable colonies after a little while.
As a closed system, your results are generally guaranteed, but neither simulation is purely deterministic if you add or ramove a single cell (or ant, or block) at a randomly chosen time and a randomly chosen location while the simulation is running. Often it will have little or no effect. Sometimes it will hugely change the outcome. You have to run that sim a LOT of times to catch the differences. And "outcome" is subjective. What is the "outcome"? When the colony reaches apparent stability? The state the colony is in after 100 cycles? 1000 simulation cycles? 10000 cycles? A week of cycles? The Earth its self is not a closed system, nor is any subset of population on this Earth. If we had provable determinism in the real world, the same joker would win the lottery every week. But since we can't even simulate the state 40 plastic balls will have after they get blown around by some air, what makes you think you can determine the state of the whole universe a billion years from now? And what of applicability of this computational predictability to the real world? We can demonstrate the fallibility of this assertion with every release of a software product that has to go out to real people in the real world with millions of computers, some of which are broken in subtle (and not-so-subtle) ways, all under the influence of real-time inputs and contending with other applications for resources. The Greeks thought they could derive all knowledge from math and philosophy alone, and they were wrong. You have to have those little "reality checks" that scientific method allows. Math always "works", but it doesn't always match what you find in reality. Actually, it seldom does. Your measurements are buggered, your assumptions are imprecise, and elements you never considered intervene. |
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
MaterialistPatriotic AgnosticSocialistNaieve Saskatchewanian RadicalCanuckistani
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 1,377
|
Franko, I didn't know you had it in you! You discovered the Theory of Everything and didn't tell us. So, how is the Quantum World related to the Macroscopic World, in what you call TLOP? These worlds are not connected in the least sense, but you seem to be able to connect them and claim that we are all insane for not seeing it. The laws of physics are not all connected, as Relativity, Newtonian physics, and Quantum physics will show you.
Give us some hard evidence, and we might believe you. (No, that voice inside your head does not count) |
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|