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

Julzes:" A rose by any other name". Sorry a dyslexic's moment.
Curiosity is quickly fading. Will you please respond to the questions asked?

Part of my arguments generally are the position that 'God' would want the discoverer of these things--the person who would rather just be an ordinary mathematician--to be close to correct, and that it was already my disposition to see the possibility of a God's existence and a Plan in a very specific way before I actually knew about the birthday coincidence (The Plan is mostly encapsulated in "The Miracle Scheme" at my PS, which is just a do-it-your-own-damned-selves sort of plan).

anancygirl: I am. I answered the first question in 899 in 900, and I have been continuing to answer other things. Let's be clear: I'm not a Christian, and only Christians believe in the Antichrist. I expect to have to argue that I'm not because he doesn't exist.

>>Take the example regarding my phone number<<

Alrighty.

>>I noticed that they differ by changing one digit the slightest amount,<<

Was there anything significant about the amount they differed by?

>>second I calculated the probability of this<<

Congratulations. What of it? Why would your phone number be organised to match (almost exactly) to the forum structure of a BBC website?

I believe OFTEL control the assignment of dialling prefixes. Sadly it falls outside of my expertise to know who actually is responsible for assigning specific telephone numbers - so how come your phone number almost-but-not-quite matches a thread on the supernatural (to a statistically significant degree) what does that demonstrate - that someone is manipulating your phone number?

>>Let's be clear: I'm not a Christian, and only Christians believe in the Antichrist.<<

Fair enough. I'm not a christian either. Snap!

Explain this then because that's left me confused.

>>say that [...] There is something like God that is probably just more advanced ordinary life (with dominion over the Milky Way) as we understand it with a creative urge directed at us, and I am the closest thing to either the Son of God or the Antichrist or any of a number of expected personages in traditional religions there is likely ever going to be<< (#896)

You don't believe in an antiCHRIST, but you think you are one

or have I munderstood? (quite likely, but one can never know for certain..._)

Clive: I'll try to tackle the last question of 899, but here I am in to guesswork. I propose that:
1) Life evolved and advanced to about our level first about 8 billion years ago. (This would be faster than on Earth, because second-generation stars are a pre-requisite, but this is a guess for a first-time. It may actually be conservative and the truth may be 10 billion.)
2) Its advance was similar to our in that an understanding of how much intelligent life around it there should be would be reasonably inferred ("Wow! There's a fairly good chance we're the first."
3) The reaction to 2 was probably to make sure that dominance was assured before other life made it untenable.
4) The advance proceeded with an ability to travel long distances efficiently, live indefinitely as organisms with the best possible medical capacity, and otherwise use technology very near its physical limits.
5) The time-scale involved permitted creative actions beyond what is normally thought of using the technology of 4.
6) This involves our virtual creation (at least some strong manipulation of life here), and is signalled to us through mathematical coincidences involving the number 365.25 in the base ten.

This is the gist. What I mean by 'dominion' is a kind of hegemony over whatever advanced life there is by an even more advanced one. The Fermi Paradox is the observation that we should have been communicated with by advanced life by now, and my argument against this supposition is that it's against the law.

for those watching at home that would be:
"If as you say advanced life has dominion of the galaxy - dominion in what sense?"

So - stop me if I'm getting ahead of myself here - the evidence of our creation (why 'virtual'?) is the mathematical coincidences (which I'm uncritically granting still) which are the result of 'manipulation.'

Okay.


So why the business with your phone number - was that manipulated?

Clive: By leaving out the parenthetical, you quote me out of context. The closest I come is to being the boddhisattva, since I lay down a Plan, but there are differences. I'm my own person, and whatever traditional religions say about what I'm going to be has been bunk. I'm a math guy, and they didn't guess the math part. The Baha'i faith doesn't seem to think I'm going to do anything in particular aside from produce a book, so I go with them.

It's just like your user number here. I told you about that.

Julzes: Are you trying to channel, Paul Erdos? (sorry I can't make my computer spell his last name correctly) but I'm sure someone will help me master this

I use 'virtual' the way most people did before all this technophilia. 'virtual creation' recognizes the limits of the creator. They didn't make a lot of what goes into us, and they probably only did the minimal amount to make sure our existence fit in with the storyline involving numbers. I've said elsewhere that while I tend to believe that they manipulated the early Solar System, they may in fact have just found it as already having certain mathematical features. I have not worked out the mathematics to make the latter seem less likely.

Well, anancygirl, I never said other people did not have good relevant ideas that influenced me; and you've written the name the way most do.

>>You quote me out of context.<<

A Thousand Apologies.

I thought I had the majority of the quotation I had not realised the parentheses were significant)


the quote, again then - this time in full:

>>say that [...] There is something like God that is probably just more advanced ordinary life (with dominion over the Milky Way) as we understand it with a creative urge directed at us, and I am the closest thing to either the Son of God or the Antichrist or any of a number of expected personages in traditional religions there is likely ever going to be (and not all that close to any of them, really, with the exception of the flexibility in the Baha'i faith in terms of what it expects.)<< (#896)

I still a little hazy on what then you believe your status to be therefore?

My status is that I'm so unique that people who are reliigious and understand mathematics might confuse me for what they are expecting from 'so unique' people. And also that I have had a headache all day, and will be taking until after the first World Series game to think up my next posting.

For those of us not up to speed with the local derby called 'the world series' when is that?

I'm off to bed soon as the hour is late. and this has been insightful.


>>My status is that I'm so unique that people who are reliigious and understand mathematics might confuse me for what they are expecting from 'so unique' people.<<

http://www.despair.com/individuality.html

For those keeping score:

>>The closest I come is to being the boddhisattva, since I lay down a Plan<<

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boddhisattva


----------

>>what I'm going to be<<

I missed that before replying to the misquote

So, you are on the path to enlightenment then I take it?

How is that going?


The Baha'i faith
--------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahá'%C3%AD_Faith



>>[They don't] seem to think I'm going to do anything in particular aside from produce a book<<

Some way still to go then?

Goodnite clive, sleep well, I'm off to play with the fur people, the moon is raising, time to check in with our local wolf pack

The answer to when the game will be over (since I'm reading here) is in about 25 hours, given that 1) I don't think it's going to rain in New York tomorrow night, 2) most games don't require extra innings, and 3) the Phillies starting pitcher (Cliff Lee) works quickly (I don't know about C. C. Sabathia). As far as enlightenment goes, I learn something new every day, like most sensible people. As for the "still have a way to go" crack; you know it's not the easiest thing to write a book, and at least a publisher with good mathematical knowledge said that what I had already was good enough for a book. I just decided to take my time, find out more, and plan it deliberately, rather than rushing something to print. If he's out of business or if I choose to go with a better-known publisher rather than someone I met at a chess tournament who happens to have a wife whose father just barely escaped Hiroshima (a chore out of town), I'm sure that I will complete the task.

>>As for the "still have a way to go" crack<<

I've been nothing but nice and accommodating all evening.

One small tease and you go all to pieces.

with the book - and I mean that.