Curt Doolittle

Theme: Causality

  • @RedPilledWorld @voxday Oh. I know Vox’s “Math” and as an explanation: non corre

    @RedPilledWorld@voxday

    Oh. I know Vox’s “Math” and as an explanation: non correlation without explaining causation. Now, the means of falsifying this particular argument is relatively simple and someone has already done so in this thread.

    For example, there are about 100M neural columns in your head. They manage to predict and iteratively test and re-predict a model of the world within a few milliseconds. This EVOLUTION of disorder into order you call perception is possible because those 100M neural colums work in PARALLEL. And they do so by adversarial competition for prediction over time. And those columns that correctly predict contain neurons that get fed for that correct prediction. Now, evolution works the same way. In massive parallel and variation and hybridization and variation and speciation and so on. So the (moronic) oversight of such calculations as vox has stated is presuming that taking an average rate of mutation in a stable life form that by its stability limits mutations is sufficient to statistically represent the wide variety of rates of mutation, the wide variety of selection criteria, and the massive parallelism that occurs as this wide range of potentials compete. Now, of course, the correct answer is that because evolution (evolutionary computation) is the function (first principle) of the universe, and because of the absolutely stupid-simple method of computation by which the universe computes increase in the capture of energy as existence – a stable relation, that anything that can be computed will be computed.

    And the rate of computation is simply the set of methods of evolutionary computation, the rate of trial and error, the rate and number of regulatory processes, the complexity of the exchange between the cellular biochemistry and the production of molecules, the rate of reproduction, the degree of parallelization, the number and frequency of speciation and recombination, the division of responsibility between cells, organisms, and complex organisms, and the chaos of the selection criteria produced by the environment, resources and competitors. Not how few of those factors are present in the ‘moron math’ of vox day. And how easily you morons are fooled by a basic incomprehension of basic statistics.

    The big ‘oops’ for example is the capture of mitochondria by one cell that tried to eat another cell. This allowed cells to divide by providing external resources of energy production, and the nucleus to divide the genetic material without increasing genetic mass, and without accounting for energy production. This ‘oops’ is not the only ‘oops’ that appears to have happened.

    SIMPLE MATH VERSION
    Any math that ends in infinities is false.
    Any math that is non-correspondent is false.
    Any math that cannot provide an operational construction is false.
    Because all of these failures are evidence of a failure to account for variables – what we call ‘hidden variables’.

    Vox’s math (which isn’t his by the way), is false.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-02-08 22:37:49 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107764768384038667

  • @asomd2021 @ScuzzaMan @voxday 1) Changes happen because mutation (fragility) has

    @asomd2021@ScuzzaMan@voxday

    1) Changes happen because mutation (fragility) has not been eradicated from the replication process for reasons too technical to go into here. What we don’t yet know is why some organisms are so good at controling limited mutation and some are not (cancer cells) or why some cells are within the norm of mutation and some are extrme outliers with 100M times as many mutations in the same generational series.

    2) Evolution isn’t the paradigm of evolution it’s the paradigm of existence itself. In other words, evolution is the first principle of the universe. I cover in normie prose in this interview:

    These three sections explain the evolution as the function of the universe, and my position on Christianity and comparative religion.

    0:11:00 – Evolution: Explaining Continous Recursive Disambiguation of Disorder into Order – A Hierarchy of Stable Relations: Existence.

    0:25:47 – Curt’s understanding of god. Christianity and Religion and General

    0:37:16 – European Evolution of Trifunctionalism vs Everyone Else’s Failure into Monopoly.

    3) So why it happens is that the universe is under pressure either by an inability to expand or a pressure to contract. This results in the energy content of the quantum background (which is terrifyingly huge in every single cubic centimeter, and every single Planck unit). So the universe can only use entropy to dissipate energy or use evolution to capture energy in a higher stable relation (state). All existence (mass) is the result of the capture of energy in complex combinations of electromagnetic bonds, where each bond assists in producing the stability of the related bonds. In other words the universe will never run out of evolutionary pressure until it ends – if it ever ends.

    4) As for one species evolving into another, I’m not sure I understand that statement, since a ‘species’ is just a taxonomy we use to represent a stable relation of a genome expressed in a life form, for some stable period of time. For example, humans are still evolving, and have evolved rapidly over the past ten thousand years, and we speciating into at least four new species before the agrarian revolution. Humans are sexually opportunistic, and sexually hyperadaptive, so we are less likely at least in the norm, to limit homogenization by hybridization. So a stable state of any organism just means it’s adapted to its environment such that limited change occurs and only slowly. Yet under duress, we see punctuated equilibriums created by the opportunity for adaptation given the potential to express adaptive mutation that was previously limited by competitors. And this allows for increase in mass by capturing those new niches. So a ‘spiecies’ is a ‘photograph’ of a common state of a related genome at a point in time so that we can measure (perceive) differences, and from those differences, learn something.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-02-08 21:52:23 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107764589743421199

  • DEFINING HOW THE UNIVERSE USES COMPUTATION VS CALCULATION Richard: Q: — “Curt:

    DEFINING HOW THE UNIVERSE USES COMPUTATION VS CALCULATION

    Richard: Q: — “Curt: So when matter is able to form a stable relationship that persists that is a computation rather than a calculation? I was under the (false?) impression that matter can only calculate and that life can only compute. Life, memory, consciousness, language are more and more precise levels of computation?” —

    This is one of my failings of inconsistency. techically only conscious life can calculate (Transform inputs into outputs by rules). The physical universe can compute by trial and error. We don’t have a word for the space between compute and calculate. So the best thing to say is that it takes life to calculate (as you said), and the universe otherwise can only compute.

    Or we can take it farther that only life can compute, only conscous life can calculate. but then we have to find some way of talking about the universe’s physical functions (which are closer to addition subtraction) and would rightly be categorized as arithmetic.

    We will always be stuck in soem of these battles becasue we want to avoid neologisms, and instead just improve the precision of terms.

    And so I try to pick the term that does the best job, and ‘compute’ is the most universal term at all scales, while calculate implies deduction and induction and therefore requries sentience (consciousness really).

    Source date (UTC): 2022-02-06 23:05:24 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107753552240020305

  • WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE ONLY REQUIRE THREE DIMENSIONS OF MEASUREMENT(DESCRIPTION)

    WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE ONLY REQUIRE THREE DIMENSIONS OF MEASUREMENT(DESCRIPTION) AND ONE DIMENSION OF CHANGE (TIME)?

    “Q: Curt: What’s so special about triangles!”

    The simple answer is that no external information is needed in order to calculate a plane just as no external information is necessary to calculate a sphere.

    Q: “What’s an example of something that would require external information in order to calculate it?”

    1) no matter what you do with three points triangle it will always and only create a triangle. (two opposing forces – two points – can create a stable state – the third point.

    2) no matter what you do to two points they will only create a line. two opposing forces can create a stable relationship.

    3) no matter what you do to a point: it will only create a point. A stable state will remain stable unless subject to an opposite charge (force)

    4) in order to create any other geometry you must apply some rule where the information must be stored externally to the arbitrary relation of the points.

    5) in other words, how can the universe know how to create a square, or a cube? it can’t.

    6) This is why the universe has only three dimensions, and can only have three dimensions.

    This is why we see all the universe evolve from one force -pressure- creating two opposing forces (negative and positive charge) we call polarity.

    This polarity (line) can only survive (maintain state) if it has sufficient energy not to collapse back into the background state – because the background state cannot produce (concentrate) enough negative or positive energy to cancel it out.

    If this object can accumulate enough force to create a stable state (survive) then we now have three points, the negative charge x, the positive charge y, and the sum of the charges z that produces a surface area (total charge) greater than the charges of x and y and such cannot dissipate.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-02-06 21:14:38 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107753116668331825

  • Just following Dr John Campbell’s (trustworthy) walkthrough of the Johns Hopkins

    Just following Dr John Campbell’s (trustworthy) walkthrough of the Johns Hopkins global study – and it’s correct that lockdowns not only made no difference, but in fact, there is a tiny correlation that lockdowns increased deaths. This duplicates the prevoius Spanish Flu studies.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-02-05 19:53:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1490050965071880195

  • @PeterZeihan (humor) Did it ever occur to you, even for a moment, that some of t

    @PeterZeihan (humor) Did it ever occur to you, even for a moment, that some of the world’s movers and shakers don’t understand the determinism of their conditions and strategy, and then take cues from you, fulfilling that determinism?

    Probably not. But it’s easy to envison. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-28 03:15:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1486900801922551811

  • Well, you know, each of us works from an axis of competency thinking our axis is

    Well, you know, each of us works from an axis of competency thinking our axis is the dominant. AFAIK the primary axis of causality is deprivation of physical competition, and deprivation of adversarial competition, and deprivation of socialization. But of course, our diet too.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-28 03:00:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1486896959101276167

    Reply addressees: @bot3685 @rich0292

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1486896333680427008

  • (I’m sure he’s just reacting with sarcasm to the wishful thinking of the nitwit

    (I’m sure he’s just reacting with sarcasm to the wishful thinking of the nitwit new age food-magic crowd as a one trick causality – and he’s mistaken because your position is broader)

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-28 02:23:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1486887544373526529

    Reply addressees: @bot3685 @rich0292

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1486840265612558338

  • Q: For group: Given: “Unambiguous (identity) and Parsimonious (reasoning from fi

    Q: For group: Given: “Unambiguous (identity) and Parsimonious (reasoning from first principles(causality).” I don’t think we have a word for “unambiguous and parsimonious” even though I’ve been searching for a way to reduce that to one concept (measure).

    Q: Leave it as is?

    So another way to state that is:

    unambiguous (identity) -> maximally deflated -> perfectly constructed

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-26 20:19:11 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107690613243520990

  • Why? Because strict construction from first principles is the most parsimonious

    Why? Because strict construction from first principles is the most parsimonious definition of causal relations possible. This is the ultimate expression of Occam’s Razor, converting it from a rule of thumb to a scientific law. https://twitter.com/bierlingm/status/1486412062498697217