h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

THE PHYSICS OF CREATION
'One can but deplore the cosmological blunder that has ensued and bequeathed us with the nightmare syndrome of the Big Bang, an expanding universe and, in respect of that first error, ‘Black Holes’.'
http://www.aspden.org/books/2edpoc/2edpoccontents.htm

You have plenty of time Toxx, what you lack is the inclination!

alji

I anticipated that response, Alji. It's a matter of priorities. Enthuse me and the reading will get higher on the list. Isn't there a joke about 'inclination' and the Tower of Pisa knocking about somewhere?

toxx

Hey, Alji. I took a look at that last link. Made a start on it, using Foxit as my PDF viewer. Adobe is so clunky!

toxx

marking

Ah, now I remember it.

Q. What did the Tower of Pisa say to Big Ben?

A. If you've got the time, I've got the inclination!

toxx

toxxin!

Toxx, have a look at this review

'Are We Just Really Smart Robots?'

'Two books on the mind put the human back into human beings.' @
http://www.reason.com/0504/cr.ks.are.shtml

Old Slaphead, Nogg?

alji

Yes, I wondered about that, Alji. Has someone been name-calling at Noggin - sorry: 'OS'?

I'll take a look at this latest link, but are you able to evaluate this stuff, Alji? It looks interesting and impressive - but maybe so does the argument on the other side.

toxx

Ah, this one is right up my street, Alji. So much so that there's little there that's new to me, and much that I already agree with. The Hawkins stuff seems forceful because I doubt that he's even aware of the alternatives to his, admittedly useful, 'predictive' model of intelligence. I favour one that is similar but, to my mind, richer in its implications. Searle, of course, seems like an old friend. I hardly have any quarrel with him!

It's the physics stuff that sends me running for an expert to tell me whether the other expert is making sense!

toxx

Toxx, did you see 'DR. ASPDEN'S SCIENTIFIC PAPERS, BOOKS AND PATENTS' @ http://www.aspden.org/papers/bib/refs.htm



alji

I'll take a look, Alji. But I wish you would give the lecture or introduce the tutorial as well as setting the reading/homework.

toxx

Aaaarrrgggghhhh!!! Alji: too much, too much! Give us the gist of what you wanna say, purleeeeeez. You find some great sources of info, but can't you relate your thinking to some of them? We get a couple of sentences of Aljiistic cosmology, for example; then a reading list that would keep us busy for months. I'm sure there's something interesting there, but if you've really read all this stuff, you could at least draw us a map.

toxx

I don't think so, it's either finite or it isn't, if it isn't then there's a boundary or wall or end of some type so there must be something on the other side-another universe perhaps? Maybe our solar system is part of a molecule and Earth is just an electron. Maybe all those other galaxies we think we see are other atoms and molecules.



The Hitchhiker's text game from years ago. I'm trying not to use the game's hints/where all the necessary clues are. I've played so much recently I could rattle off all the steps to get off earth and then off the Vogon ship. It is NOT the same as any other version, it's only similar-for instance: when Arthur-the character you are at the start of the game- and Ford leave the pub if you don't feed the dog the lousy cheese sandwich before the Earth is destroyed you can't solve the game.

All these links with conflicting theories tells me nobody has the answer, and this is further evidence by the need for 'singularities' and other fudging. One theory says it's all expanding from a central point: ok, where? Someone else says it's 13.7 billion years old yet it's 157 billion light years across. I have no problem with faster than light speeds: unlike Einstein I have no trouble with simple math either, but you can't convince me this is true in one breath while telling me that you can't go faster than light in another. Who knows, maybe black holes are sources of energy for stars.

Let me know if you need help with the game, Dr J. I've finished it, after much trial and tribulation.

marking

>>[OS/Noggin]

[Dr J]I don't think so, it's either finite or it isn't,...<<

What fun! Here we have a problem concerning the domain of a modal quantifier!

OS/N means "Probaby(The universe is finite)" NOT "The universe is probably finite".

<...if it isn't [finite] then there's a boundary or wall or end of some type so there must be something on the other side-another universe perhaps?>

You mean "if it IS" or "if it isn't INfinite". Allowing for that - you still haven't understood the difference between space and nothing. Space, although (probably) it is expanding, would appear to be finite. There's no other material thing anywhere. If there were, we would include it as part of the universe. There isn't even a 'beyond' or an 'outside'. No wall, no 'other universe', *nothing*!

A further related point is that it seems logically possible that there are spaces other than ours. 'Other Space' is a region of space that does not stand in any spatial relation to our space. In other words, no matter how far one went in any direction, one wouldn't find it. Hence, it wouldn't be 'outside' or 'beyond' the universe, but stand in a kind of separation that is not spatial. I know of no argument that any such space exists; neither do I know of any reason why it shouldn't.

Phew, toxx

Thanks, Echo, that's very generous of you. The last time I ran through it was about 5 years ago for a coworker whose laptop I infected with the game. He became addicted and there was just no end to his suffering, so I ran it in a DOS window and captured the moves while I played. Somewhere on one of the pc's I have is a copy of all the moves needed, when you should just wait a few moves, things not to bother with, things to take and so on.

I think there's more satisfaction in solving it all over again. Besides, I love the snide replies to strange requests. Have you ever tried punching Prosser? "You muck up all his fancy facial work. This is the last moment of satisfaction you will experience for some time." and if you try and get Arthur to kiss Trillian: "This is family entertainment, not a video nasty."

At this stage of the infection the game flows through my veins. "Lights whirl sickeningly around your head, the ground arches away beneath your feet, and every atom of your being is scrambled, an experience you're probably going to have to get used to. You are in...
Dark
There's nothing you can taste, nothing you can see, nothing you can hear, nothing you can feel, nothing you can smell, you do not even know who you are."

So, just another Monday morning for me-another Thursday for Arthur.

I don't think anyone says this, Dr J. The universe is expanding like a currant bun rising in the oven. It expands equally in all parts, with the currants being superclusters of galaxies. Here is a reference to a brief account of the standard scientific model.
http://www.herts.ac.uk/astro_ub/a14_ub.html

I think everyone should be familiar with this before venturing out into the unfamiliar territory where Alji's links sometimes lead.

toxx

ok - i'm gonna try to jump in again, in re: space, infinite or not? (same rules apply - feel free to yell at and flame me...)

whether space is infinite or not seems to be more a problem of perception - that is, if you started walking east (on earth, and on water, etc.) you would eventually get back to where you started, but you would never come to a real "end". Hence, the earth would appear to hold an infinitely expanding space (no boundaries, you can keep going and going), no? if space is curved in any way (in a positive way i assume, more than a negative) the same rules *should apply - you could theoretically keep going around and around and never hit a boundary, or end. Does that mean that nothing exists somewhere and that the current universe is expanding into it? who knows? to imagine "nothing" is to imagine "something" (whatever it may be - the nutritional value of a Twinkie perhaps) thus rendering nothing into a something and confusing the hell out of me.

i still believe that we're in a slow decline across the event horizon of the larger part of the universe, the so called dark matter that nobody can find (the original black hole, which, when all matter has fallen back into it, will burst forth into a new big bang, equally and oppositely, like the balls on strings that click and clack back and forth over coffee). i should point out that i am not well either...

toodles, twinks!

I have no problem with the concept of 'nothing'. I have a problem with something that is infinite having a boundary. I have a problem with 'space expanding' as if it is not infinite: where is it expanding to?
<

I don't think anyone says this, Dr J.>

The big bang says exctly this, and I also have a problem with space originating at some central point. I see no proof of this, only theories with some far more plausible than others and many written by inept con artists. The link you post is just more rhetoric about the red shift and expansion theory [from the 1920's] that makes no sense. It is simply another version of creationism which claims authority over the bible by being 15,699,995,000 years older.

One recent anti-big-bang link posted here was allegedly penned by a well educated person. He rambled on about how the red shift isn't due to expansion for page after page dumping various math formulas here and there. Then he summed up his true belief in the last sentence: "It is clear that God did not limit Himself to a finite universe at one time and place, but made the universe in His own image, infinite in space and time." It's no wonder the Canadians kicked him out.

I really don't care what mathematics can allegedly prove or disprove either, since mathematicians in the past have predicted some of man's desires insurmountable that we take for granted today such as flight, travelling faster than sound and leaving the planet. After all, travelling at any speed is relative and -according to some pundits- we're already part of a galaxy that's expanding away from the big bang point at the speed of light and we have yet to realize infinite mass of anything. So much for E=MC2...no wait a minute that looks funny, how about E=MC^2? It's all a guess and when things don't make sense the pundits will drop in exceptions to explain away the errors. Oh, see well this explains that and gee, over there OUR laws of physics don't apply so that's why this is like that. Rubbish.

I await The Coming of The Great White Handkerchief, or the hatching of the earth into a giant start-goat, whichever comes first.