"A computer program can predict the arrival time of my car once it reaches a particular destination as long as I obey certain simple rules. However, this is the key, I didn't get in the car and turn the key and then let the car go in a predictable fashion. I am still the driver making the decisions along the way. If a computer can calculate anything, it is only because I have chosen to drive in a predictable manner."

So, you can break Universal laws at your own bidding? Those "... certain simple rules" are the rules that you must obey in order to drive your car to a particular destination. (From what I gathered...) that is what Yaniru meant by saying that.

Every choice that you make is based on laws, every decision, every photon that you 'see,' everything that will ever happen will happen based upon these laws.

If the laws are known, and the position and values of every particle in existance, then it can be programmed into a computer... after all, the Universe, and anything beyond, is but a supercomputer. It only makes calculations based on the laws of itself. UIt cannot break these laws, and if it were to break a law, that law never was a law, just a coincidence based on other laws. Existance: a math problem. The Universe cannot, as far as I know, just make up stuff that doesn't agree with pre-determined laws. It cannot happen.

However, as far as I have thought, the Universe is the simplest, and most complicated computer that can calculate anything with any accuracy. It is reality, it defines reality. Reality would be different if there were one particle less than there currently are.

Warm Regards,

Phillip Martin

• Laws? We don't need no stickin' laws - harvey1 - October 23, 2002 - 23:42 UTC
  • Gods? We Don't Need No Stickin' Gods - phillipmartin - October 24, 2002 - 00:42 UTC
    • Sure you do - harvey1 - October 24, 2002 - 05:16 UTC
      • Well... - phillipmartin - October 24, 2002 - 22:53 UTC
        • Well... Well... - harvey1 - October 25, 2002 - 12:38 UTC
          • No - stormcrow - October 25, 2002 - 14:29 UTC
            • See my response above (nt) - harvey1 - October 25, 2002 - 15:58 UTC
      • ohh, speaking of Alexander... - phillipmartin - October 25, 2002 - 00:46 UTC
        • Or, for those of you with fast connections... - phillipmartin - October 25, 2002 - 01:04 UTC
      • Who "beat" Alexander, Harv? Nobody. - occupant - October 25, 2002 - 03:09 UTC
        • paranoia - yaniru - October 25, 2002 - 11:19 UTC
          • Man, did you read this? - stormcrow - October 25, 2002 - 13:58 UTC
            • Agreed- That is even better evidence - yaniru - October 25, 2002 - 14:47 UTC
            • Evidence that a 20-year-old major in electrical engineering - occupant - October 25, 2002 - 15:46 UTC
              • Sorry-- paranoia - yaniru - October 25, 2002 - 18:34 UTC
            • Wow, how do you post those links? - spazcon - October 26, 2002 - 04:24 UTC
              • Just type in the address, it does the rest by itself. - phillipmartin - October 26, 2002 - 21:42 UTC
                • Cool ! Testing..... - spazcon - October 27, 2002 - 00:52 UTC