Not Sure Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 I’m actually surprisingly comfortable with the thought that we live in a simulation, it actually gives me comfort. Life, death, the significance of everything as well as the insignificance all are balanced. Maybe the creators of the simulation are human enough to let beings keep their consciousness after they die. Science still works 100% in this theory, humanity develops just as it would, but somehow for me the stress of it all is mostly lifted and I’m much more layed back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 I think that if we lived in a simulation, it would probably be less like the sims, and more of a particle physics simulation. Like this but 2^294 times larger. All the subatomic particles seem a bit too much like lego blocks for a simulation to me. In the far future, when we have quantum computer, we can probably slap these particles in a simulation and watch the universe be born in a lab, or maybe even at home in the basement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 6 hours ago, p1t1o said: Once you spot it once, you spot it everywhere. And after a while, its like "Oh. Ha. You said "42". Cool I guess." There's this electronics router box near my house with the number 42 stencilled on the side. I'm always like "Hah! Forty-two!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 18 hours ago, Not Sure said: I’m actually surprisingly comfortable with the thought that we live in a simulation I'm (probably) sitting in a chair (I can't see it behind, just feeling), clicking the keys with fingers, looking at the bright rectangular in fron of my eyes, where some tiny black glyphs appear while I'm typing. Sometime there appear other glyphs which I hadn't typed. Strange, looks like the rectangle responds to me. I can read words from these glyphs, like somebody is talking to me. More of that, looks like the bright rectangular has many personalities, they are even arguing with each other. Does this rectangular have mental problems? Is it possessed by a crowd of invisible creatures? Why I'm imagining them like real people when probably they even do not exist? I tried to make a video of me, typing and reading, maybe this is an hallucination or a virtual reality? The video was just showing me, sitting motionlessly, typing just with fingers, looking at the bright rectangle. And the rectangle is really writing the glyphs itself. (Now I understand why the cats were looking at me so strangely.) Is this a virtual reality or a real virtuality? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p1t1o Posted October 5, 2018 Author Share Posted October 5, 2018 To me, the distinction must be meaningless. The answer to the question: What is the difference between a virtual universe and a real one? ...is quite literally unknowable. Now ponder this: https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/torres20141103 https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/Edge20151114 If we ARE simulated, there is a school of thought that says the only logical endpoint of the simulation is when too many subjects become aware of the simulation. Ergo, if we are in a sim (which cant be disproven) merely discussing the subject raises the probability that the universe will wink out of existence by a finite, non-zero amount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceMouse Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 On 5/4/2018 at 11:46 AM, Geonovast said: Almost every day, unfortunately shower thoughts usually don't stay with me long. I'm pretty sure I've solved world hunger, I just don't remember how. I'll be back here, I'm sure... If only everything we thought of stuck with us... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HansonKerman Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 On 9/13/2018 at 5:19 PM, adsii1970 said: Ok, completely random shower thought. How come it is four, fourteen, four hundred, fourth (as in fourth place), one-fourth, four thousand, but forty? Does anyone else see the discontinuity of the English numbering system? Forty. Fourty. Both seem wrong to me. Um, let's just try a completely new spelling...? Dr. Suess single-bookedly invented the word "nerd", let's respell forty. Furty? Foruty? Hmm On 10/4/2018 at 7:08 AM, p1t1o said: When the number "42" is mentioned in a story, is it sometimes not a a reference to Hitchhiker's Guide? Yeah right? Lemme say something... once, last year, I was doing some multiplication schoolwork, and one of the problems was 7x6... I mentally laughed even before I penciled them down. On 10/4/2018 at 12:10 PM, Not Sure said: I’m actually surprisingly comfortable with the thought that we live in a simulation, it actually gives me comfort. Life, death, the significance of everything as well as the insignificance all are balanced. Maybe the creators of the simulation are human enough to let beings keep their consciousness after they die. Science still works 100% in this theory, humanity develops just as it would, but somehow for me the stress of it all is mostly lifted and I’m much more layed back. If you made that smile a little bit warmer, you'd get the feeling. Also, if we are in a simulation, well, to the creators, thank you. Don't turn us off. Spoiler (uh oh, does that mean we're gonna be turned off?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 I've just read that "fourty" is an old and obsolete form of 40. Isn't it the same story with colour → color, neighbour → neighbor, etc. If so, and they are replacing "our" with "or" everywhere, then "our" should → "or", "your" → "yor", and "bourbon" → "borbon". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 42 minutes ago, kerbiloid said: If so, and they are replacing "our" with "or" everywhere, then "our" should → "or", "your" → "yor", and "bourbon" → "borbon". "or" is already a word which is commonly used, and doesn't have the same meaning as "our", so that distinction will stay. And I think it's far more likely for "your" to be replaced with "ur"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Baron Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 Concerning "Strauße". Hehe :-) Our (German) reformation of orthography in 1996 and amendment 2004(?) really messed things up. I stubbornly refuse to participate and continue using ß as often as i can. The bird is a Strauß (ostrich), plural Strauße as is the bunch of flowers (Strauß Blumen), but plural Sträuße. In last names (Strauß/ss is a not uncommon last name) both versions exist and i'd assume that these persons would insist on the correct writing in all cases. The composers Johann (I, II and III) Strauss (often written with ß, but they themselves wrote their names with ss) as well as Richard Strauss have a double s. Though phonetically it doesn't matter in this case. It gets funny with the plurals of these guys, shall we make them birds (Strauße) or bunches (Sträuße) ? Frequently, for a plural of a name an -es is added (Strausses), but that could be confused with the genitive of bird or bunch by those who follow the new orthography and write ss. All in all, here's to the English speaking world. Your comprehensible and (relatively) easy to learn language will make it into the future ! :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernel Kraken Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 Why isn't the sky violet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 1 hour ago, Kernel Kraken said: Why isn't the sky violet? Because the thing you think is violet is actually just actual violet and red. source Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 (edited) 8 hours ago, cubinator said: "or" is already a word which is commonly used, and doesn't have the same meaning as "our", so that distinction will stay. English is never afraid of homonyms. It bears the bears. 7 hours ago, Green Baron said: It gets funny with the plurals of these guys, shall we make them birds (Strauße) or bunches (Sträuße) ? Frequently, for a plural of a name an -es is added (Strausses), but that could be confused with the genitive of bird or bunch by those who follow the new orthography and write ss. Try the key phrase: "Str(a/ä)uße! Stop hassling us with your music! People are trying to sleep here! It's 3 a.m. now..." Edited October 7, 2018 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 (edited) Daryl in Walking Dead spends bolt by bolt and just from time to time gathers them back. Molly in Molly makes an arrow herself. Because only archers of 10+ level have infinite ammo. (That's why Daryl still uses factory made bolts, while Molly uses a self-made trash.) Edited October 7, 2018 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted October 7, 2018 Share Posted October 7, 2018 (edited) Why didn't ancient China discover Alaska if they had such massive navies? Edited October 7, 2018 by DAL59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 (Searching for ancient China in Alexander's and Roman chronicles.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shpaget Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 (edited) On 10/7/2018 at 12:16 AM, Kernel Kraken said: Why isn't the sky violet? As usual, xkcd to the rescue. Also, this: Edited October 8, 2018 by Shpaget Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernel Kraken Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 5 hours ago, Shpaget said: As usual, xkcd to the rescue. Also, this: This is what I was referencing. I love the forum. On 10/6/2018 at 11:17 PM, kerbiloid said: English is never afraid of homonyms. It bears the bears. English Is a pain, even from a native English speaker who's a bit of a spelling pedant, but it can be understood through very tough thorough thought. Think about it very thoroughly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p1t1o Posted October 8, 2018 Author Share Posted October 8, 2018 30 minutes ago, Kernel Kraken said: This is what I was referencing. I love the forum. English Is a pain, even from a native English speaker who's a bit of a spelling pedant, but it can be understood through very tough thorough thought. Think about it very thoroughly. Preferably whilst taking a stroll along a thouroughfare....just dont trip on a trough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Lion Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 When the mind wanders in wonders, we seem quite mature and intelligent... Though thoughts may or may not come together in coherent fashion. Genius ideas, not yet conceived or inane ramblings are equally probable, but genuine. Those thoughts (even when flat-out silly) are even articulate when conveyed to others afterward. Yet when we physically wander near/through/in wonders, we seem fixated, in awe or completely dumbfounded by the experience. Ignorant, even, no matter one's intellectual prowess. It's as though the experience leaves one without a knowledge of speech, grammar... or even words afterword. Our words seem disingenuous or we just can't stop repeating an understatement. ...Sometimes with lasting effects. I wonder why wandering is such a wonder when wonders make our minds wander. (Sleep-deprived shower thoughts are still shower thoughts.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted October 8, 2018 Share Posted October 8, 2018 In KSP I'm designing a family of standard retropropulsion stages with four foldable radial retroengines. It's obviously named "Quadrofolder" ("4 + foldable"). (FAM-QF-12 aka Quadrofolder-12 for 1.875 crafts and FAM-QF-16 aka Quadrofolder-16 for 2.5 crafts Because 12 and16 are their diameters in my KSP units (1 unit = 0.15625 kerbometers). But I was at a loss how to name two families of the upper stages: hypergolic (inspired by Breeze, Fregate, and Agena) and cryogenic (inspired by KVRB and Centaur). The hypergolic family originally appeared as two families. A lesser one, diameter = 1.25 (i.e 8 units) up to 3.75 (i.e. 24 units) with a conformal external tank. It was designed only to have a common propulsion unit which can be suddenly replaced with a hollow fake propulsion unit with a warhead inside. (To surprise a Martian base with a transforming scientific probe) As it was a fake booster, the family was originally named "Fooster" ("fake + booster"). A bigger one, normally 3.75 wide, was inspired by Breeze. As it was too dull to not have its fake version, I also made a hollow fake conformal tank for 40 lesser warheads inside. So, this family was named "Freezer" ("fake + breeze + -er because a noun"). Later I've united them and the hypergolic family had no more name. The cryogenic family is dull and without surprises. Originally I was going to name it "Hydra" because hydrolox. But hydra isn't associated with something speedy. Also afaik there is no English term exactly matching "acceleration block". They call this "upper stage" or "space tug". These variants mean something another than what I want. But now, when having a shower (literally), I got it. HYpergolic, HYdrogen, HYdrazine, and HYperbolic (orbit) obviously force to use "Hy". The thing is a propulsion module. Kinda a propulsor. So, I now have chosen two names: Cryogenic (hydrolox) family (prefix FAM-HYD) is now "Hydropulsor". Hypergolic family (prefix FAM-HYP-...) is now "Hypropulsor". These names show both similarities and differences of these stage families, and exactly explain what are they for. Now I can go to bed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted October 9, 2018 Share Posted October 9, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KerbMav Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 On 10/8/2018 at 2:41 PM, p1t1o said: Preferably whilst taking a stroll along a thouroughfare....just dont trip on a trough. That would be rough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0111narwhalz Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 You can fill an infinite two-dimensional array with an infinite one-dimensional array by placing the nth element in the one-dimensional array into the next open element in the column of the two-dimensional array with index k where the kth prime is the largest prime factor of n. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernel Kraken Posted October 10, 2018 Share Posted October 10, 2018 If plastic is made from oil, and oil is made from long dead organisms (ie, dinosaurs) then plastic dinosaurs are made out of real dinosaurs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.