Shower thoughts

[kerbiloid]

They can.
 

Spoiler

 

 

Spoiler

https://ru.depositphotos.com/185599428/stock-video-large-mosquito-crawls-surface-light.html

So, it's not enough just to chop off its wings, but also better break its legs.

(Or put cement shoes on it. This also prevents flying.)

Edited July 2, 2018 by kerbiloid

[p1t1o]

55 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

They can.
 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

https://ru.depositphotos.com/185599428/stock-video-large-mosquito-crawls-surface-light.html

So, it's not enough just to chop off its wings, but also better break its legs.

(Or put cement shoes on it. This also prevents flying.)

I tell heartbreaking stories to the ones that enter my house, that way they just get dispondent and mope around, having lost their appetites.

[GoSlash27]

From a dinosaur's point of view, we're the horrifying mutants wandering around a post- apocalyptic hellscape

 

[kerbiloid]

Cockroaches even can't recal, how has all this walking crap spread around.

Edited July 3, 2018 by kerbiloid

[cubinator]

Polaris probably won't ever be the North Star again.

[0111narwhalz]

On 6/3/2018 at 9:25 AM, Kernel Kraken said:

The best theory as to when the world was created is the last Thursday theory, because it's impossible to disprove.

The universe was created last Thursday and we are all given false memories and possessions of time before last Thursday to make it seem as if time has existed for thirteen billion years. 

I prefer Next Thursdayism, in which I claim the world will be created next Thursday. You will remember this conversation, or not, as if it really happened. You will also remember, or not, your conviction that the world really does exist now.

But, come next Thursday, you will be utterly unable to prove it.

[kerbiloid]

28 minutes ago, 0111narwhalz said:

The best theory as to when the world was created is the last Thursday theory

Friday, 17:55, for sure.
At 5 minutes before the workday and week end.

(That's also why it stayed untested.)

Edited July 23, 2018 by kerbiloid

[KerbMav]

2 hours ago, 0111narwhalz said:

I prefer Next Thursdayism, in which I claim the world will be created next Thursday. You will remember this conversation, or not, as if it really happened. You will also remember, or not, your conviction that the world really does exist now.

But, come next Thursday, you will be utterly unable to prove it.

And that, children, is how religious wars start.

[cubinator]

14 hours ago, 0111narwhalz said:

I prefer Next Thursdayism, in which I claim the world will be created next Thursday. You will remember this conversation, or not, as if it really happened. You will also remember, or not, your conviction that the world really does exist now.

But, come next Thursday, you will be utterly unable to prove it.

But if the universe doesn't exist yet, then I can't know that it will exist by Thursday. But you do know. Therefore, I conclude that you are God.

[Ho Lam Kerman]

When you think about it, why last Thursday? For all we know, it could have started a split second ago, in it's current state, but we just remember having done stuff in the past. Heck, for all we know the time I typed the first sentence of this comment could be but a memory.

[Kernel Kraken]

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Last_Thursdayism

I first got it from XKCD then I found this after looking it up.

There's even a cult called the Church or Last Thursday.

[qzgy]

Ok about last thursdayism, I always got the concept but just mulling over it right now, wouldn't it break cause of Heisenberg uncertainty? Or, some mechanism for that would have to be figured out? Because the whole premise of it is that the entire universe is basically recreated in exactly the same state. EXACTLY the same. Now, I might be missing something, but that would mean some mechanism has to read the exact state of every particle in the universe and then basically pop it into existence, after destroying it (into presumably... energy or something).

Maybe someone can help explain? Because in this case.... occam's razor.

[cubinator]

1 hour ago, qzgy said:

Ok about last thursdayism, I always got the concept but just mulling over it right now, wouldn't it break cause of Heisenberg uncertainty? Or, some mechanism for that would have to be figured out? Because the whole premise of it is that the entire universe is basically recreated in exactly the same state. EXACTLY the same. Now, I might be missing something, but that would mean some mechanism has to read the exact state of every particle in the universe and then basically pop it into existence, after destroying it (into presumably... energy or something).

Maybe someone can help explain? Because in this case.... occam's razor.

Any theory that describes the creation of the universe breaks our current model of physics, because we don't know enough to say how to create a universe.

[0111narwhalz]

3 hours ago, qzgy said:

Ok about last thursdayism, I always got the concept but just mulling over it right now, wouldn't it break cause of Heisenberg uncertainty? Or, some mechanism for that would have to be figured out? Because the whole premise of it is that the entire universe is basically recreated in exactly the same state. EXACTLY the same. Now, I might be missing something, but that would mean some mechanism has to read the exact state of every particle in the universe and then basically pop it into existence, after destroying it (into presumably... energy or something).

Maybe someone can help explain? Because in this case.... occam's razor.

The universe wasn't destroyed and recreated, but rather just created in the first place. And as for Occam's razor: Is a history of over 13 billion years of physics doing its physics-y thing and somehow resulting in intelligent life really simpler than it being created exactly as-is?

(Yes, it is.)

[Kernel Kraken]

6 hours ago, qzgy said:

Ok about last thursdayism, I always got the concept but just mulling over it right now, wouldn't it break cause of Heisenberg uncertainty? Or, some mechanism for that would have to be figured out? Because the whole premise of it is that the entire universe is basically recreated in exactly the same state. EXACTLY the same. Now, I might be missing something, but that would mean some mechanism has to read the exact state of every particle in the universe and then basically pop it into existence, after destroying it (into presumably... energy or something).

Maybe someone can help explain? Because in this case.... occam's razor.

Yes. Every Thursday, the universe is destroyed and rebuilt in the exact same state as it was last Thursday. 

We are given the impression that time has been around for thirteen billion years with false memories and evidence.

[qzgy]

2 hours ago, 0111narwhalz said:

The universe wasn't destroyed and recreated, but rather just created in the first place. And as for Occam's razor: Is a history of over 13 billion years of physics doing its physics-y thing and somehow resulting in intelligent life really simpler than it being created exactly as-is?

(Yes, it is.)

So what happens to all the old universes? Does it all splinter off or something? If so why can't we find those? Surely they must exist if they aren't destroyed. (but yeah, I agree, 13 billion years of physics and chance seems simpler than just poof a new universe every week)

6 minutes ago, Kernel Kraken said:

Yes. Every Thursday, the universe is destroyed and rebuilt in the exact same state as it was last Thursday. 

We are given the impression that time has been around for thirteen billion years with false memories and evidence.

I get this. I'm trying to understand how. Is it just MAGIC or is there some mechanism, or is there a demon named Maxwell or what? Because then that mechanism must be absolutely flawless at reading states....

4 hours ago, cubinator said:

Any theory that describes the creation of the universe breaks our current model of physics, because we don't know enough to say how to create a universe.

I will concede that....  but this model has worked pretty well so far. So............ IDK.

[cubinator]

I was under the impression there was only one creation implied in Last Thursdayism...not once every week.

1 hour ago, qzgy said:

I will concede that....  but this model has worked pretty well so far. So............ IDK.

So it's safe to say the universe is 13 billion years old, and the laws of physics haven't changed or exceptions made, because to say otherwise is simply an unnecessary overcomplification.

[kerbiloid]

Is the current Universe compatible with early backups?

8 hours ago, cubinator said:

it's safe to say the universe is 13 billion years old, and the laws of physics haven't changed

Of course it's safe as nobody can check.

[razark]

12 hours ago, cubinator said:

I was under the impression there was only one creation implied in Last Thursdayism...not once every week.

Well, the universe was created last Thursday.  Then a week passes, and it's now been more than a week, so the universe was now created Thursday before last.

Obviously, this heresy is absurd to orthodox Last Thursdayists, therefore the universe must be destroyed and recreated to maintain the creation on last Thursday.

 

Perhaps you're thinking of some other sect of Thursdayism?

 

14 hours ago, qzgy said:

I'm trying to understand how. Is it just MAGIC...?

We're talking about an entire universe that came into being about a week ago, fully formed with the appearance, physical properties, memories, etc. of a 13+ billion year existence.

Is magic really out of the question at that point?

Edited July 25, 2018 by razark

[p1t1o]

The point is that you can discuss it until the cows come home, you still cannot prove it false.

 

But its also kind of real in a small way, in that you are measurably a different person every time you wake up in the morning.

We die every night and a new person is born every morning, the two people share some memories (but not all) and are physically similar (but not 100%).

How is sleep any differnt from being killed every night and a clone generated every morning?

Would you sign up for that?

[cubinator]

12 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Would you sign up for that?

No, because it's not different or better in any way than the life I'm living normally.

[p1t1o]

1 minute ago, cubinator said:

No, because it's not different or better in any way than the life I'm living normally.

What I mean is, sleep is weird and scary and nobody knows what it is!!

 

Why does every mammal and many other creatures on earth have to turn off every few hours, for a few hours?

You can say "to get rid of toxins" but the body is perfectly capable of eliminating toxins whilst awake.

You can say "to rearrange the days memories" but nobody knows how memory really works either, except in the broadest of terms.

Nobody even really knows what they mean when they say "rearrange the days memories"

 

[kerbiloid]

Maybe then first ask: since what lifeform the sleep appears?

And the second thing: distinguish "sleep" as on/off cycles and "sleep" as some kind of nervous activity.
The first one appears since the very beginning.

3 hours ago, p1t1o said:

Nobody even really knows what they mean when they say "rearrange the days memories"

I'm afraid, every lazy student is aware, after 2-3 days of non-sleep marathon before the exams.

Edited July 25, 2018 by kerbiloid

[StrandedonEarth]

6 hours ago, p1t1o said:

Nobody even really knows what they mean when they say "rearrange the days memories"

"Defragging the hard drive..."

I believe sleep is when the short-term memory cache is dumped/flashed/shipped/encoded into long-term memory. Kind of hard to do that when new input is still happening, perhaps.

[ChrisSpace]

The world of Into Space 2 (and all the games inspired by it) should be in complete darkness, with so many planes and blimps and satelites no light should be able to reach the surface.