Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

INFORMATION AS A FOUNDATION

0 helpful
568 replies

by fluxit

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

of the universe is an emerging view in deep science. In fact, the universe is built on far more information than its capacity to store it. More interesting, the basis of the particle universe is digital and not analog.

This then brings into question what is our computer? Is it a computer within a computer like an infinite loop of video feedback or opposing mirrors?

Are we all Max Headroom of a sort?

What is the behavior of sureal numbers like infinite to the power of infinite. Why is the Earth at the exact geometric mean in terms of order of magnitude between the smallest particles and the largest galaxies? Both of which we cannot directly see. We only indirectly test and evaluate these objects.

Which is correct the Blind Watchman Argument or Intelligent Design?

568 replies

by jessie

"And as soon as I figure out what you just said, I'll come back with a smashing reply." Danny Kaye - 1954 - White Christmas

My gut feeling says Intelligent Design... I just feel like the Universe is too ordered for there NOT to have been someone putting all the pieces together... but I'm sure we won't find the true answer in this lifetime.

Of course, then the question is, Is there truly order to the universe or has man imposed a pattern in order to "wrap his mind" around the chaos?

by absolutely

There's a fantastic book called "Sync" that I've just finished reading. It explains how vaious chaotic systems spontaneously synchronize, and for me finalized the conclusion that there does not HAVE to be any "designer", and that the entire universe is totally understandable as simply the sum of its parts. Of course there are still questions that cannot quite be answered, like the exact value of the Hubble Constant and all that depends on it, but my analysis is that the truth is out there, and not behind any one-way glass.

by hal 9000

To have that particular 4 letter word #### out whenever it is posted.

At least that way we could all get on with our lives without having someone read something that was never intended into any of our postings. :)

Col ]:)

by absolutely

What evidence leads you to believe that the universe is built on far more information than its capacity to store it? This is a fascinating claim that I would love to understand fully. Websites, book titles, please, whatever.

by fluxit

How do we achieve the most efficient storage of data occur in this Universe? Try one electron for one bit or let's go smaller and use one quanta for a bit. Now try to store all the information about that quanta or electron using that same bit. You'll need to store information like weight, dimensionality, charge, and duration of existence in that single bit. Oh by the way, some how my posting needs to be stored using bits and the information about the equipment will need to be stored. But the quanta is too busy trying to store data about itself and cannot be tasked with superflurious data.

Oh wait DNA stores information but requires information to act on the strand such as timing, sequencing, and duration of genes firing? Where does that information comes from?

Could it be that data is not stored physically in this universe? Perhaps you can enlighten me as to where all this information comes from. I believe Dr Dij has a mysterious POOF! and it appears from nowhere.

by sleepin'dawg

being deficient in manners. Too bad there isn't a "Poof" that could make you disappear. Contempt does not begin to describe what is felt for your ignorance, lack of intelligence and overall bad manners. Take a hint scumbag, we are rapidly reaching a point where you won't be addressed or responded to unless you clean up your act.

Dawg

by Member 25348569

Perhaps it's your incomplete understanding of what your trying to say. It may be our limited understanding and I'm willing to explore it.

A couple of issues. Why do you believe that electrons are binary? Where do you get the concept of the "bit" from? Intel didn't make them.

As for the DNA. DNA is a part of a more complex system. On its own, it does nothing. The signals for replication are enzyme triggers kicked off by chemical stimulation - too much something, too little something. This is all in the scientific literature if you go and look. Nowhere does anyone mention extra-universe storage.

As Absolutely requested. Sources, please?

by absolutely

You switch from one definition of "information" to another. Observe:

"Try one electron for one bit or let's go smaller and use one quanta [That would be "quantum", by the way. Quanta is plural, the singular form is quantum] for a bit. Now try to store all the information about that quanta [-um] or electron using that same bit. You'll need to store information like weight, dimensionality, charge, and duration of existence in that single bit."

The first two times you use the word information, you are referring to a physical data storage device for human use, which for our *convenience* is engineered to use the electromagnetic force, and two possible states, traditionally a positive voltage for 1 or on, and zero or negative voltage for 0 or off. Quantum storage would work according to similar principles, where spin 1/2 particles could be used in binary computers, and some research is investigating four-state systems for quantum cryptography.

To use that bit for MY purposes, I do NOT "need to store information like weight, dimensionality, charge, and duration of existence in that single bit". All those other properties of the electron or quantum are considered when devising the technology to store the bit of information, but they exist *independently* of the storage device. Your use of the word "information" is not consistent with the meaning used in information technology or information theory. Weight, dimensionality, charge, and duration of existence are *attributes* of a particle, and information in computers can be stored using only variable attributes like charge at a location. The mass of a particle for example, cannot be used to store information because it is constant, while the spin state of an electron has two possible values: up or down. In short, information storage requires a minimum two-state system, and mass is constant for any particle, meaning it has only one state.

More abstractly, the mass, dimensionality and charge of the particle are constant throughout time, so the total information that the universe needs to store is vastly less than you must suspect, to make the claim that the universe cannot store itself. To keep track of all bottom quarks for exmple, the "Universal Supercomputer" only needs to store the constant mass and possible quantum states for the bottom quark once, in a single storage address on the Universal Supercomputer. When any particular bottom quark wants to know what to do, it just reports its location to the Universal Supercomputer, which runs a few simple algorithms based on the interactions of the four forces, and voila, the bottom quark has its instructions! There are a finite number of types of elementary particles, each with attributes that are constant throughout time, and all that changes is their location, which itself is dictated for each quantum by its relations via the four forces, to other nearby particles.

But really that is all beside the point because your use of information to refer to a quantum's or electron's "weight, dimensionality, charge, and duration of existence" are incorrect. "Information" is meaningless as applied to inanimate objects. Inanimate objects have attributes, not information. Information is a construct, an intellectual tool unique to thinking organisms. Applying the concept to anything not human nor invented by humans is an example of anthropomorphism.

by hal 9000

It's all down to the White Mice who built this planet and star system as a giant super computer to find out the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life the Universe and Everything. :)

They designed us even in the currently corrupted form that we are in to be inquisitive and find what we perceive to be order in disorder. It doesn't mean to say that there is any order just what we perceive and reason there to be order. Remember the girl who suddenly found the answer that made everything seem worth while just before the Vogons destroyed the place to make room for a Hyper Space bypass? ;)

She had your answer now all you have to do is go out and find her and be with her when she discovers the answer but of course you being there will probably prevent her from doing this and there will be someone else who discoverers the answer so you'll still never know because we'll all be destroyed before the answer can get out or the Vogons couldn't get paid to prevent it from happening could they? :D

If you want to see the real creators of us at least you need to look at the trans-dimensional beings that we perceive as White Mice. :p

They are the Blind Watch Maker and ID at the same time and still are neither. ;)

Remember

Go placidly amid the noise and the haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant, they too have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.

If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain or bitter; for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself. Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery. But let not this blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism. Be yourself. Especially do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is as perennial as the grass. Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth.

Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness. Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore, be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be. And whatever your labors and aspirations in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul. With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams; it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful.

Strive to be happy.

And the really important passage here is

Therefore, be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be.

Now that can range from God, Allah, Buddha, Jehovah or even the White Mice. It's all in your own personal perceptions. :p

Col ]:)

by fluxit

I am so used to being put on the defensive with continued less than rational scientific oh let us say emotional attacks and insults that my initial response is to return fire in kind.

Information is thought to be stored holographically versus physically in this universe. Using wave theory and Fourier's formulas compounded data can be stored and recalled.

However, scientists are baffled because no one can determine the origin of information using pure science. It is a boundary limit that science cannot cross.

I'll pull resources on this. In fact, instead of posting here I'll write techbriefs and post them on my site.

by jmgarvin

Science can't break into a philisophical mode!!?? AMAZING REVILATION.

And what are you talking about with Fast Fourier Transforms (I assume this is what you are getting at)? All it is really used for is to convert TDM to FDM and vise versa (www.cis.rit.edu/htbooks/nmr/gloss.htm). So you are saying that somehow magically we can use this to store holographic images "in the universe?" How does that make any sense?

You always try to whip out wave form this and [insert mathematical formula or intert buzz word here] that. The problem is you don't know the first thing about them.

Please explain to me how using the Fourier Transform we can deduce that information is stored holographically.

by absolutely

Mister Garvin, clearly you do not know MrMiami very well. Your use of the word "explain" is hilarious.

His is clearly an example of the "new faith", wherein not only proof and evidence are dismissed as heresy, but knowledge and understanding of any kind are tantamount to blasphemy! Explain...giggling maniacally...MrMiami, explain...ha!

No, he just uses words that he doesn't understand, just as he doesn't understand his faith, and now can no longer understand the concept that understanding is even possible to humans.

Did you notice how nicely deepsand made the symmetric replies?

Sorry about the frivolity, it will happen again though!

by fluxit

In holography data is stored basically in constructive and destructive concentric waveform patterns that is the outcome of a reference beam and a data beam combining from a highly polarized waveform source - a laser in most cases. Fourier series deal with waveforms combining waveform signals or pull them apart for data aggregation purposes without having to store it in the traditional sense of an electrical charge on a silver-oxide surface. There may be a surface of some sort but not as we think traditionally.

Historically, data storage effiency has been improving. 30 years ago it took millions of electrons to store one bit of data. Today data storage efficencies are much better. But the traditional storage methods store only attributes of an object and not the essences of the object.

Holography is a capable of storing the essence of the object (with all the attribute embedded) and may actually be the method not only by which our minds store data but the universe itself since the implicit domain of the universe is essentially an ocean of waveforms.

Therefore, waveform mathematics applies.

by hal 9000

Just like an electron can only exist in one plane either up or down which can be con strewed as a 0 or 1 if you want to look at it in binary terms.

We are constantly trying to find order in what may very well be a disorganized Universe and because we lack the ability to prove the hypotheses that is exactly what they remain nothing more and nothing less.

Man kind can look at something and expect to find order and even establish order where none exists and because they think that they have created order they just work along and never question the original hypotheses that brought the order in the first place and promote this hypothesis to a theory without the scientific testing that it requires in an attempt to show order higher up the chain.

Of course I'm only applying this to things like Quantum Theory and other sciences in their infancy that while are interesting are still no where the position of being able to prove the hypotheses that they are built upon.

Col ]:)

by fluxit

Math works in the Quantum layers as it does in the mesophysical and physical. The mathematics used at the Quantum level center on probabilitic or statistical outcomes rather than non-linear systems of equations used in the physical.

by deepsand

And, why stop with quarks?

After all, there's no way to prove that they too are naught but aggregations of even smaller particles.

It's still a Tower of Turtles, all the way down.

by hal 9000

Quantum Theory well the bit about the electrons anyway the current hypotheses is that an electron can only exist in one plane either up or down and reducing this to binary terms means a 1 or a 0. While it may well be correct it is just s Hypotheses and still lacks the ability to be tested but it is what a few people are doing in an attempt to try to make Quantum Theory more understandable by the masses. It is the main article in New Scientist's February Issue.

Col ]:)

by Member 25348569

I'll check it out. But he's still talking about an attribute which is its own information simply because it is a state and therefore measurable. (Leaving out any Uncertainty Priciple from this).

Neil :)

I'll stick to beating him up on DNA, I don't have too much time for Quatum Physics these days.

by Member 25348569

Have you got the new Dr. Who yet?

I enclose this snippet from the UK papers:

"Censors have ruled that children under the age of 12 will not be able to buy the new series on Doctor Who on video or DVD because it shows excessive cruelty towards a Dalek."

You couldn't make it up!

Neil :D

by hal 9000

I'm still crying from laughing so hard on that one excessive cruelty to a Darlek? :)

What about the excessive cruelty that the Darlecks inflict on every other species? Or are they now more PC and all touchy feely? ;)

Actually it starts here next Saturday Night at 7.30 PM so I know where I'm going to be if momy lets me. :D

I wounder if I'm old enough to buy the videos, maybe I'll be adversely affected by all that mindless violence. :(

God only knows what they must make of the rubbish like Days of our lives the Bold and the Beautiful or as I like to call it the BS for the Brain Dead. ;)

Anyway I'm working on learning how to program a VCR as the destruction manuals are really not all that clear and I'm only a lowly computer tech so I'm not expected to understand such "High Tech" things. :D

Col ]:)

by deepsand

You seem to be referring to Quantum Spin, which I understood to have long since have been demonstrated.

Are you referring to a different conjectured property?

by hal 9000

I only got to read half the first column of the article but I did see the word Hypothesis used quite a bit when referring to this particular thing.

The article was about making Quantum Theory useful to the masses so it could be better understood. As I said I only got a bit of the way through and then the quack called me one of the few times he was actually on time and I haven't got around to reading any more of the article.

That nasty other not to ever be used 4 letter word W##K has got in the way and prevented me from finishing it but as it is in the February Issue and I'm only now getting to have a look at it should tell you something. :(

I'm unlikely to have any time in the foreseeable future either as tonight I've just come from the Intel Channel Partners 2005 meeting so I have a heap of stuff to wade through from them, and of course the one useful tool that they promised us is missing from the pack.

Some days you just can not take a trick ;)

Col ]:)

by deepsand

Just don't make the mistake, as I did, of allowing a contractor to wander through your abode, for the purpose of taking measurements, unattended.

Now, they've turned into [b]one[/b] large pile!

Needless to say, he's [b]not[/b] getting the job.

by fluxit

I getting tired of posting bits and pieces of a much larger concept then have people nit pic the minutia. I don't have time to keep re-iterating stuff.

I'll prepare a bunch of tech briefs and post them to my personal site.

You can go there

by Member 25348569

If you just posted a few sources and we can go and make our own minds up and, more to the point, check the credentials and objectivity of those sources.

Please don't feel the need for "tech briefs" as we're all big boys here. If we want anything technical explaining, we'll go and ask Colin who, as we all know, bounces TWICE when dropped.

http://tinyurl.com/dp2p7

Neil

by hal 9000

Booked marked that URL? ;)

Actually I thought that you awarded me a Dishonorer Doctorate for the sheep thing so it should read PhDPhDPhDPhD one bounce for every two fuds. :D

Col ]:)

by absolutely

FOR THE PAST DAY AND A HALF, I'VE BEEN LAUGHING SO HARD AT YOUR DRIVEL I'VE WET THREE SEPARATE PAIRS OF MY BRIEFS! YOU OWE ME, MRMIAMI!

PS I LOVE TO SHOUT!

by deepsand

You could'nt defend your postion at EL, so you thought to escape by beginning a new discussion.

How very juvenile.

Now, go home & stay in your room.

by absolutely

I've been fanning the flames of this moribund argument relentlessly for something like a month now.

Finally, some results! ;)

by deepsand

This is clearly someone who has bought into the idea of others, with no clear understanding either the premises or the manner in which the conclusion was deduced from those premises, simply because the conclusion affirmed his pre-existing believes.

As a result, he his wholly unable to defend said idea, but can only parrot others; or, as we here see, cobble together a pseudo-scientific statement comprised of techo-babble, in the hopes that his detractors will be unable to provide suitable rebuttal, with the result to follow that it is we who are unable to comprehend the truth owing to our lack of the requisite skills for grasping the scientific & mathematical issues involved.

Furthermore, he still fails to grasp the fact that no amount of supporting evidence can overcome a premise that is logically flawed, no matter the verity of the conclusion.

The sad part is, he really believes that it is we who are the idiots!

by deepsand

Powered by Franklin Electronic Publishers

The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search box to the right.

Suggestions for mesophysical:
1. mesophyllic
2. mesospheric
3. mesophyllous
4. mesophylls
5. mesophytic
6. museological
7. misfocused
8. misfocusing
9. misfocussed
10. misfocussing

by deepsand

He's the respository of all the "information" in the universe; but, in being such, lacks self-awareness.

As a result, he is on a quest to find himself!

by deepsand

Although I must confess, it seems to definitely be non-human, and therefore is most likely of extra-terrestrial origin.

He may have friends out there, such as the Vogons, at his beck & call.

by absolutely

A quantum mechanics professor who had a very enviable reputation at this particular university, used the word mesoscopic once to describe a system containing a number of quanta such that its behavior fit neither the microscopic (quantum) nor mesoscopic (classical) descriptions well. I do not remember what the properties of this scale of system were supposed to be, but I vaguely recall that the professor thought it to be of no theoretical importance, nor to have much promise in technology.

But MrMiami, even if you used "mesophysical" meaningfully, and although quantum mechanics is described by probabilistic math, the microscopic phenomena described by quantum mechanics are also "physical", not distinct from the physical but a smaller scale of the same universe in which Newtonian equations describe macroscopic objects at sub-relativistic velocities.

by deepsand

No doubt this would be viewed as a disruption of Holy Synchronicity, in an attempt by the Minions of Evil to disrupt the Eternal Continuity that Pervades All & provides for the Omnipresent Communion of The Believers with The One and Only True Creator of The Universe, Seen & Unseen, Knowable & Unknowable, Real or Otherwise.

Damned, I'm good at this sh.it. Many have told me that I should be a writer; perhaps I'll specialize as a Prophet.

by absolutely

I think MrMiami is a lot easier to take than people I've known who defend their faith as if it is their own idea. They are the frightening ones, who give the impression of knowing what they are placing as a higher value than life on Earth according to one's own intellect.

I get the impression that MrMiami might actually believe in heaven & stuff. It's quaint, and even a bit comforting.

by absolutely

Took away my third die, now I only have 2 sixes ;)

Excellent work, btw, making the responses above such a symmetrical triangular pattern!

Now, I simply must find my password and write it down to access this page from work at lunch tomorrow. I read the posts at lunch today, and this is just too much fun to wait all day long!

by jck

Nothing in the universe is ordered. Either we order it, or we quantify it to make it seemed ordered at some level we perceive with comfort.

The universe isn't built on anything more than what it is. And, it has capacity to store everything it is built on. It is just that we are not capable of defining or quantifying the extent of existence within it.

Also, the basis of the particle universe is not just digital...it is energy and matter which work together in a symphony of chaos. Digital and analog are just forms of energy understanding being passed across matter.

In the concept of what we are, you can imagine things of a sort based on principles of infinite size and infinite minutia. Indeed, light refracts 1 inch ever so many hundreds of millions of light years due to gravity. Hence with the bending of light from a source, eventually in an extremely long period of time that light would travel full course in a circle.

So, we may well be fish in a fish tank for which some larger life has no concept of our incredible smallness. Likewise, we may look upon the cells, molecules, atoms, alpha particles, leptons and quarks and think we have discovered the smallest part yet, when all we are probably seeing are googleplexes of existences of our type whose smallness is not yet perceivable by us.

Mathematically, infinity is never reachable and therefore infinity to the power of infinity is just infinity. It is a concept, not quantifiable finiteness.

by absolutely

The evidence of ID here seems to be that the information in the universe is more than the universe can contain. Then perhaps all dishes other than Tupperware and similar products that fit within one another are also particular proofs of the existence of a higher power? Sorry if this doesn't make sense, I think somebody put something in my drink!

by jck

I need a drink...maybe I'll go home and pick up some Captain Morgan on the way.

by fluxit

is a layer between the quantum and the physical layer. It is often used to describe where nano-technology acts since constructs like protien micro-tubules possess quantum properties like superposition.

I thought you guys were scientists?

by fluxit

If one looks at the universe as an outcome of software code then what is the minimal amount of code necessary to form it then operate it. How much information is necessary to feed it?

by absolutely

Like I have said, information is a construct of thinking organisms. This universal information to which you refer is only the relation of mass, energy, and distance among all the various constituents--quanta--that comprise the system. Different quanta operate according to different rules, which our intelligence can comprehend and describe, but that does not make the quanta intelligent themselves!

by Member 25348569

That's a movie, you know. It's just a little less real than nanobots.

If one DOESN'T look at the universe as an outcome of software code...

Neil

by hal 9000

We are now in TRON watch out for the Master Control Program before he/she/it catches you and puts you into the game arena to be wiped out of existence. :D

Col ]:)

by jmgarvin

Did you skip your finite state automata and algrithmic analysis courses?

I would guess you claim P=NP

by jck

Are you normally like this, or stoned and possessed by Tim Leary?

I could really get into some cool talks with you about Brownian Motion and Improbability, but it's time for no tea. ;)

BTW...want a good paper to read, get "Magnetic Theory" by Edward Leedskalnin. See if you can understand that. If not and you're in Miami, head down to Homestead.

Leedskalnin was a genius. He proposes theoretics and ideals I can't even begin to imagine.

Oh wait...that just means I'm dumb. hahaha ;)

by absolutely

would only lead to the logical conclusion that Fourier methods might have some relation to your case, not the direct application you imply. The claim that holography is capable of storing the essence of the object with all the attributes embedded is particularly...difficult.

Why do you suppose that human memory is stored holographically? I'm pretty sure there are no lasers or optical data retrieval systems in MY head...

by jmgarvin

At no point in your rambling, did you even come close to an intelligent thought. I award you no points, may God have mercy on your soul.

You still didn't answer the question. How does TDM/FDM or the Fourier Transform relate to holography?

by deepsand

I'd like to read it; it does sound like their addressing Quantum Spin, which goes wasy back, and is the explanation underlying the Pauli Exclusion Principle.

by jmgarvin

They need to optimize it. Had "they" actually coded it in C++ rather than C#, they would have gotten it down to a few million gigabytes ;-)

by absolutely

to ask "deepsand"? What kind of a name is that?

I got mine from the vague, non-absolute wishy-washy arguments I found in the EL thread and being annoyed by them. If you rather, offended till I was blue in the face, whatever. Actually, I'm thinking of a more generally applicable handle. But back to you, deepsand. How did you pick your name?

by hal 9000

I've just had a look at the New Scientist Web Site and they list No Articles in the archives.

Sort of makes you wonder why they bother with the web site doesn't it?

Col ]:)

by Member 25348569

It doesn't take more than a simple 'Find in this page' for 'sheep' to get any interested party right to it!

Neil :D

Still - MM's scored a point with "mesophysical" as this mythical domain where biology meets quantum. I should have Googled it. Though I still think he thinks that nanobots really exist and that The Matrix is history.
!

by fluxit

and tdm and fourier transforms that you seek to know other than how it applies? Do what want proofs? Do you desire to learn about how to practically apply those methods? What is it about those you desire?

by absolutely

It is their application to the view you are proposing. Fourier theory is useful because functions that cannot be represented by a single periodic wave can be represented as a superposition of severa periodic waves. How does that support the claim of too much information in the universe for there to be no "backstage area"?

by jmgarvin

What your comments on the Fourier series have to do with ANYTHING in your post. Also explain how holography and TDM/FDM create some kind of magical matrix for you.

by sleepin'dawg

with one so cerebrally challenged, seeing as he claims that corner of the universe for himself. Actually I just left ippirate and his prostate problems over on EL. I should be receiving some sense of his wrath and indignation some time tomorow. LOL

Dawg ]:)

by fluxit

Guys, I'll address many of your questions shortly. I am very busy right now...

by jmgarvin

I think MrMiami is tapped for information. He's been called on all his technobabble and now he is waiting for us to forget so he can obfuscate some more!

by deepsand

Without it, some people would have nothing to say, and might be mistaken for dead.

With it, when they do speak, we know that it's time to change the channel.

by absolutely

I'm reminded of a Catholic theologian who I believe was assigned the task of combatting the tendency of people to "lose" faith as the application of reason began to prove its worth. The solution: the "logical" need for a first cause. I might have to phone a friend for this one, but I think that's the way this argument that God "must" exit began.

by sleepin'dawg

Okay big mouth you've shot your load and been proven somewhat deficient in facts, logic and common sense. Now go and learn some manners before returning to spread more of your insane views. Your bad manners are irritating but might have been tolerated if anything you said had one iota of truth or fact upon which you based your silly assinine comments. Now you are on the edge of being totally ignored. It must be wonderful to live your life knowing you will never need any Preparation 'H'.

Dawg ]:)

by fluxit

I had to prepare for a speech and got tasked with a coding project. I do work unlike some you who are here all the time posting a 1000 times a day.

"Yo, dis es DeepCrap. I yo homie in dis hood. The word for today is 'Obfuscate'. Can you say 'Obfuscate'?"

I have decided instead of putting up with your nonsense, slights, and other demeaning banter and babble I have begun to write a series of tech briefs on my website. Each brief covers a topic with references and conclusions. I will include a feature later up the road to permit a dialog on the topics I have written about.

I'll attempt to provide some sort of 'whiteboarding' on the site that supports graphics and mathematical symbols.

by sleepin'dawg

MrMiami and holography in the same post??? This one I really want to read. There are many things that holography can be used for but this is the first time I've ever heard of this particular application unless he is referring to virtual reality.

Dawg ]:)

by deepsand

1) It's allegorical.
Consider the 2 words "deep" & "sand," as well as the concatenation of the 2. What images do these conjure up? What emotions might be evoked or suggested. And, what of their opposites?

2) It was once used as the code name of a covert operation.

3) It's self descriptive.

Before you hear my explanation, I'd be very interested to read your deductions or speculations.

by absolutely

Deep makes me think of water, or of people smoking weed describing their inability to understand one another's trivial "ideas". Also, it is used in the sense of "deep trouble", or "deep science", which may be quite synonymous, indicating an extreme state. "Deep in sand" only brings to mind images of quicksand. That's all I have for the name "deepsand". I just can't imagine depth without a liquid quality, unless we're discussing the dimensions of a solid or extended object. I guess with the hint covert operations, you might have had an assignment far into enemy territory, in the desert? I dunno. But I do like bikinis.

by hal 9000

The February edition dated 05 February 2005
No. 2485 I think as currently I can not find the magazine like everything else here I think it has got buried under all the paper work that needs doing.

Col ]:)

by hal 9000

When poured from a container and it is only the amount/depth that makes you think that it is solid. The reality is that sand is made up of millions of tiny particles which tend to slide against each other so it really acts more like a fluid than a solid unless some other agent is used to bond the individual particles together.

Col ]:)

by absolutely

that you already know the answer, Hal? If so, lay it on me, the suspense is boring me. I lack the imagination required to treat a lot of particles as a liquid when I know they are in the solid phase. It's a shortcoming.

by hal 9000

Think of grains of sand as atoms and the jar/bucket that you are pouring them from the sand will flow like water or maybe a more vicious fluid toward the ground and then start to spread out. A liquid does exactly the same thing except that the bonds that hold the molecules together are no where near as strong as sand but if you where to try to go swimming in a high salt content body of water like the Dead Sea you would find it almost impossible to sink without added measures being taken. Similarly you could go for a swim in mercury which is a fluid at room temperature but a solid at a lower temperature and a temperature much higher than what is required to turn water to ice.

Really it is all in the way that you view solids for instance when you tighten a steel bolt up it stretches and that stretch is what makes it tight and capable of holding things together. So I see bolts as some sought of elastic substance while others see it as a solid substance that is impossible with normal tools to distort or stretch.

Sand is much the same if it isn't so compacted together you can and do sink in it hence the popular misconception that is quite often mistakenly called "Quick Sand" this is just an area where the sand is no where as compacted together and has a much higher water content so the individual grains slip against each other and allow whatever is placed upon them to sink into the what looks solid ground. It also explains why areas like this are of limited size as the amount of water required and the ability to move masses of sand particles away are limited so you on one step can be on firm ground and on the next step sinking into the watery mess. But if you could move a bit further on you would find solid ground again.

Is that confusing enough?

Col ]:)

by deepsand

Consider also the following:

1)The differences between both the boundary layers & the optical transmissivities of Sand & Water.

2) The similarities in their abilities to cloak that which lies beneath their surfaces.

3) The human condition(s) that might be analgous to the above.

by deepsand

ippirate interjected himself in defense of MrMiami.

So, you may be correct in concluding that ippirate saw him as intellectually inferior.