Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
More On Dr. Dick's Paper MEETS Chris Langan's CTMU

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Alan on September 12, 2002 11:01:43 UTC

Hi folks,

I talked about the idea of a unique person (unknown). Actually, to be unique IS to be known.
But known to who?

Well, there was supposed to be a dog that was in a unique meeting with this person. And still the MEETING was supposed to be unique even after subtracting one information unit from that pairing.

So I figured that the unique person was KNOWN to the dog! And that the subtracted unit represented something characteristic of the MEETING itself between person and dog.

Now if there was a pre-ordained RULE that predicted the circumstances of that meeting; then such a rule will be contained within the subtracted unit.

In this case there is only one unit of "infognition" (recognition/ shared information) between the person and the dog. So the MEETING is its own rule; and not predictable.

But in fact the person had a history of many meetings before meeting this dog.

And the dog had a history of many meetings before meeting this person.

And I could also talk of the dog as unique; the meeting as unique; and subtracting 1 item of mutual "infognition" from the pairing. That was another perspective on this.

Now, this dog-history of meetings; and this person history-of-meetings; bump into each other.

In this "transaction" (to borrow from John Cramer); there are two individual sums-of-meeting-histories that "feel out" (to borrow from Roger Penrose) a common path. And in this process; the two perspectives on an item being subtracted (so the two perspectives each are the square root of minus 1) "interfere" with each other as some paths are not taken.

The final path might be regarded as characterised by a cloud of "virtual meetings" (virtual 1-on-1 meetings, so virtual fermions) that are exchanged around the margins of the actual common path that brings the two sums-of-histories together.

The force (the pressure of the difference between the two sums-of-histories) is thus mediated by virtual particle exchange (as I think Dr. Dick has said).


The transactions and surrounding virtual exchanges, from a series of meetings, may be regarded as a "superstring".

"Vibration" of that string (variation between possible meeting-sequences) thus makes visible the forces.

Have more to write later; including about cellular automata.



Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins