HISTORY Creedo gives RMT a potato:

creedo299

creedo299

Epochal Historian
Knock knock, Whose there?

Potato mato. Potato mateo who?

Potato demoto, how's your flato?

Creedo sees RMT to give it to him.

Creedo; Hi Rains what's going on here?

RMT; Oh' nothing.Kind-a fooling around with my medals and such.

What-dugh-you-got-there creedster?

Creedo; It's a golden potato.

RMT; Wow that's something,.Did you build it yourself?

Creedo; Yep, I brought it, then painted it gold and put little tiny wheels on it.
I did this just for you.

RMT; Thank you.I'm really impressed, you should not have done this.

Creedo; Well' your a friend, so,..

Creedo ask, What are you in your military suit for?

RMT; Well I got this new sword and I'm going to go threaten a chicken.

Creedo, Hugh?.......Whua?
Creedo; a chicken?

RMT; Yup, a real live chicken.

Creedo; What will be the outcome of you threatening this chicken?Will it be that all of the medals on your chest are teaching him a lesson?

RMT; Naw, nothin so Vietnamish.This is more like the movie, The Sound Of Music, put to action.

Credo, Hmmm?
 
Basically he is saying:

Blows of the blows, that alli '? I kill of the potato. Mateo of the potato who? Demoto of the potato, how is its flato? Creedo sees RMT for darlelo. Creedo; Hi rains what is igniting here '? RMT; Oh ' nothing.Kind-a that deceive around with my medals and such. to creedster What-dugh-you-obtained - alli '? Creedo; It is a gold potato. RMT; The ululación that is algo.Did you you construct same you? Creedo; Yep, I brought it, later painted gold and position the small very small wheels in him. I did hardly this for you. RMT; Really thank for you.Ím made an impression, you you must not have done this. Creedo; A friend flows ' his, thus then. Creedo requests, for which you in your war game are? RMT; Well I obtained this new sword and I am going to go I threaten a chicken. Creedo, Hugh?.......Whua? Creedo; a chicken? RMT; Yup, true an alive chicken. Creedo; Which will be the result of you that you threaten this chicken?Will that is that all the medals in their chest are teaching a lesson to him? RMT; Naw, nothin so Vietnamish.This is more like the film, the sound of music, put to the action. Creed, Hmmm?
 
Yeah, that's it!

Actually, I have known Creedo long enough now that I actually can interpret (and sometimes speak) "Creedospeak". Essentially, he is making fun of me for the way I hound and harangue Hercules with his silly statements that he cannot prove.

You need to read "threaten a chicken" as "give Hercules a hard time".

Creedo is big on nonsensical innuendo! Could someone please pass the bag of potato chips? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/yum.gif
RMT
 
Essentially, he is making fun of me for the way I hound and harangue Hercules with his silly statements that he cannot prove
Click to expand...

But I did prove that YOU had NO understanding of the interpretation. You still use your influence to make an ILLUSION that I am silly and I don’t know anything. That’s OK. I don’t get UPSET so frequently.
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

So FAR no one has DISPROVED the interpretation. To understand the interpretation, first they must have deep knowledge about COMPUTERS.

I have seen HIGHLY QUALIFIED people don’t even know how to install a software in to the hard disk. RMT would say: “In to the hard disk? No you are completely wrong, one can install a software into the computer only!”

Gues you are angry with the Schrödinger’s cat? I haven’t seen you reply to that thread!! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
RMT: In to the hard disk? No you are completely wrong, one can install a software into the computer only!

Hercules: The hard disc is inside the computer, when you insert the CD/DVD into the CD/DVD ROM drive, the data is copied on to the hard disc(Hard disk is connected to the CD/DVD ROM drive internally and also connected to the motherboard thruogh the IDE cable and the RAM is present on the motherboard) and installed to the Operating System(windows,Linux,etc.) ruuning on the computer. Then you can work with the software.

RMT: Again, you ignore my points. You keep changing the subject. First it was hard disk, then it was CD ROM, then it was OS and finally it is software. You keep changing the subject and you think you are sly by doing it that way. How will I understand if you keep changing the subject now and then. You ignore my FACTS: You can install a program only into the computer. I have installed it, so I know it.

Hecules: /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
The discussion was originally about: was Time Traveling a feasible proposition to get an old IBM 5100 to fix a problem that would arise with IBM Legacy applications in 2038.

For all this time it was debated that whether it is possible or not with respect to the evidence and information present on THIS worldline so far. On that context, there will be no need for such a mission.

My interpretation says, yes that mission was necessary in Titor’s worldline and it is not necessary in our worldline. The reason is Titor gave the IBM 5100 to our worldline in 1998, so that the IBM 5100 was put to use in our worldline by a programmer. The programmer was also able to “guess” the extensions of the 64-bit architecture of the FUTURE before it was released in Feb 2001 and implement it in the emulator. Titor left AFTER that was done.

A lot of technical issues is involved in this and even “co-incidences” like Bowler deleting his website about Y2K fix after I sent him the message.

This was originally started as a DISCUSSION. I don’t understand why RMT, having NO IDEA of what it is, comes to the discussion and debunks it with all his efforts, may be to get the bag of potato chips? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif

If any one is following this discussion, better allocate a few hours of your time to read very long explanations of RMT’s response to my posts, as usual. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
So now Hercules is having a conversation with himself pretending to be me. If that is not a sure sign of mental instability, I don't know what is!

RMT
PS - I didn't respond to your Schroeding's Cat post because it was (a) Silly and it (b) ignored the point I already made about how you are ignoring time as a continuous vs. discrete phenomenon.
 
a) Silly and it (b) ignored the point I already made about how you are ignoring time as a continuous vs. discrete phenomenon.

Its because its your OPINION that its silly. I like to think and analyze QM on my own and all opinions matter in this Forum. And that is something yet to be verified. There is no agreement when I signed this forum that said I should forsake all my thoughts and ideas just because someone is insulting me.
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
That's fine... but how about you try doing this: Try PROVING to me WHY you think time is discretized when ALL the evidence from science and engineering tells us it is continuous.

If you really do have a EE degree, why are you so willing to throw away the distinction you learned between s-plane and z-plane phenomenon? Why are you willing to ignore for silly (and it is more than just my opinion) flights of fancy about infinite discrete time quanta?

RMT
 
But I did prove that YOU had NO understanding of the interpretation.
Click to expand...
And that would be laid squarely on YOUR shoulders for your problems in communicating PRECISELY what that interpretation is. Sure, some of it could be attributed to english not being your first language, but even with that consideration, your elicitation of precisely what your intepretation is poor, at best. How about spelling it out PRECISELY, instead of always hiding behind the argument of "you don't understand the interpretation." If I don't it is because YOU have not communicated it satisfactorially. Not to mention the number of times you change (or is that "tweak" it)!
still use your influence to make an ILLUSION that I am silly and I don’t know anything.
Click to expand...
Not an illusion. You have clearly made silly (not scientific or factual) statements and I have pointed them out. As you usually do, you simply ignore them and do not address them, even when I gather them together into one post.
So FAR no one has DISPROVED the interpretation.
Click to expand...
You see, that right there is SILLY! I have stated over and over again that the BASIS of science is that those making claims (or even interpretations) are the ones who must prove them. It does not, and never will, fall on others to DISPROVE them. Silly, silly, silly! I hereby revoke your degree in engineering for malpractice! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Gues you are angry with the Schrödinger’s cat? I haven’t seen you reply to that thread!!
Click to expand...
See my PS reply in this thread. It was such a silly posting that it did not deserve benig addressed in that thread. You bring it up here, so I told you why I thought it was silly before, and still find it silly now.

RMT
 
Re: HISTORY Creedo gives RMT a potato:

That's fine... but how about you try doing this: Try PROVING to me WHY you think time is discretized when ALL the evidence from science and engineering tells us it is continuous.
Click to expand...

It is an attempt to solve the incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics. Time does move continuously. But once you travel to the past there is a possibility to may drop in to any point in time and time continues with your presence on that worldline. It is a different way of seeing nature. Many have tried solving this, and I like to be one of them. There is nothing wrong in trying to discuss an issue about nature and a degree has nothing to LIMIT my thinking. In fact, why the conventional current direction is used as positive to negative in EE, while the electrons move in the opposite direction is a debate that continues till today.

"It's a pity he has to quote Goering on this. I believe the quote was not original with Herman Goering. It goes back before that, but I don't like much that criticism. It's not really a criticism. It's just a feeling he doesn't like the idea, but it doesn't get you around the problem. Schrodinger pointed this problem out very clearly and I think he was absolutely right. He was saying if you apply my equation to something on the scale of a cat, you get this nonsense, which is this dead and alive cat at the same time. And he was saying you shouldn't be using my equation, Schrodinger's equation, to describe something like a cat. Something else has to come in. Now, he didn't make any suggestions as to what this might mean, but I think he is right although all sorts of points of view are developed to try and accommodate Schrodinger's cat one way or another. The main two are that somehow the environmental decoherence causes the state to get so complicated and mixed up with the environment that you have to change your procedures. None of these things really work if you follow them through. The second one is the many-world's interpretation where we say the cat is there and these superimposed states and if somebody comes along and looks at it and that person now has superimposed versions one seeing the live cat and one seeing the dead cat. And they are in superimposition too and the argument is that somehow - you have to generous about that point of view here here - your conscious perceptions must perceive either the live cat of the dead cat and it is not really explained why. According to Schrodinger's equation, you should be perceiving them both at the same time. That's actually not what we perceive. It's where you are driven if you don't believe there shouldn't be a change in quantum mechanics. You are driven to this many world's view, but it doesn't get you out of the problem. So what I'm saying is why don't we think about changing Schrodinger's equation at some level when masses become too big at the level that you might have to worry about Einstein's general relativity. And that there will be a change in the structure of quantum mechanics at that level. Another way of saying this is what is quantum gravity? You see, most people think quantum gravity means you apply standard quantum to the structure of space-time and this means you have to do something different about space-time structure. Okay, I don't have any qualms with that but what I worry about is why standard quantum mechanics at that level. Now, I can see why people when they do quantum gravity why they don't change quantum mechanics, because if you change that, you've pretty much changed everything, so what do you do? So I can see that it doesn't tell you where to go. Nevertheless, it what might what nature is doing and, I think there are good reasons to believe that that is what nature is doing and there are changes in the structure at that level."

Roger Penrose
Professor Emeritus, Oxford University
 
Re: HISTORY Creedo gives RMT a potato:

Another thing is, Penrose beleives limiting the human thoughts is more like Computers. Computers only perform the tasks they are programmed for. That is the difference between Human Intelligence and computers. That is PRECICELY what I beleive in too.
 
Re: HISTORY Creedo gives RMT a potato:

It is an attempt to solve the incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics.
Click to expand...
I would hope that you understand that incompleteness is not something that can be solved in ANYTHING. Have you studied the works of Kurt Godel? QM is incomplete, but so is standard theory... as is ANY attempt to achieve a closed system of logic. And I do believe that this is what Penrose is even trying to say, in his usual long-winded manner. You cannot come up with a theory that will be free of paradoxes, because they are inherent in any attempt to fully quantify anything. In fact, paradoxes and incompleteness are GOOD THINGs because they serve as wake-up calls for us to measure our theory against real (empirical) situations.

IMHO, somewhere around 90% of theoretical physicists are doing non-work. And the ridiculous gyrations they go through, along with an endless stream of new, descriptive terms, is nothing more than mental masturbation with little-to-no useful output. That is because they insist, some at all costs, on avoiding integration of aphysical (spiritual) understanding as a means to abandon the reductionist approach.

And that, my friend, is all your approach to Schrodinger's cat is... it is reductionism taken to its most absurd extent. There are plenty of other people "in the know" that understand that a reductionist approach only goes so far, and that it must be balanced with emergence. The die-hard reductionists are in for some very rude awakenings in the next 5-7 years as humanity becomes witness to the next great emergence of our species. Of course, you can laugh all you want, but I am not making any claims or trying to "solve" anything. I simply know. As in gnosis.

RMT
 
Re: HISTORY Creedo gives RMT a potato:

RMT???
The die-hard reductionists are in for some very rude awakenings in the next 5-7 years as humanity becomes witness to the next great emergence of our species.
Click to expand...

Wow that’s a big quote for you to make.

Prey tell RMT!

Part with this wisdom!

Share this enlightened information with your beer drinking brethren from the land of OZ!!!
 
Creedo; It's a golden potato.

RMT; Wow that's something,.Did you build it yourself?

Creedo; Yep, I brought it, then painted it gold and put little tiny wheels on it.
I did this just for you.

RMT; Thank you.I'm really impressed, you should not have done this.

Creedo; Well' your a friend, so,..

Creedo ask, What are you in your military suit for?

RMT; Well I got this new sword and I'm going to go threaten a chicken.
Click to expand...

This stuff is just so bloody funny!!!

You are an interesting person Creedo!
 
And the Civil War began on or about 11:55 p.m. 12-31-05 when a band of renegade Herculesians came over the ridge and crashed the RMTinian party, commandeering all the burgers. CREEDO was there, he tells the story better. History would show that no one recognized this as the launching point for the Civil War until 2008....
 
Back
Top