Curt Doolittle

Theme: Causality

  • There is only one physics and only one first principle of physics, that is consi

    There is only one physics and only one first principle of physics, that is consistent in physical, behavioral, evolutionary laws and the logics we use to describe them. When we use the term were can use it to describe correspondence with – or deviation from it: error and deceit.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 22:44:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483571019529043968

    Reply addressees: @Apollo33052943 @Jay_D007

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483569168620277761

  • Q: “How do you define The Existence Dilemma? Would the universe exist because it

    Q: “How do you define The Existence Dilemma? Would the universe exist because it is a simulation and also because it is the opposite of a simulation? Could there be an infinite number of factors that make the universe exist?”

    It’s not a dilemma it’s a sophism. There are no paradoxes or dilemmas. (Really)

    1. Despite talking heads, there are no mysterious processes remaining in the universe. We merely lack means of measuring what is an exceptionless regularity in the universe, we call its first principle or cause: under pressure the quantum background (zero point) has only expansion (entropy-disorder) and aggregation (mass-order) available to release the stress. The universe is purely classical. “Mathiness” is a pseudoscience. (Mythology)

    2. Despite talking heads, in a universe under pressure the same competition for solutions to stress will manifest in predictable means. The only difference would be in velocity, frequency and amplitude of variations in the quantum background. In other words, only one optimum set of laws will emerge and they will produce an invariant outcome. Why? geometry limits orbitals (puzzle pieces), and orbitals determine potential connections. In other words, the universe is purely geometric at all levels, and there is only one solution that is survivable, but that solution will emerge in some form regardless of the initial state.

    3. Despite talking heads, we have no evidence of whether our observable universe is singular, whether it exists inside a greater macro universe, or whether our universe is but another bubble in a froth of multiple universes. However, we have no evidence or logic that suggests any other variation on this universe can exist. Everything suggests not. There is no knowledge yet by which we can predict which organization of universes: singular, container, or bubbles exist.

    4. The computational behavior of a universe cannot be simulated except as the universe itself. In other words we cannot be living in a simulation.

    5. Humans have an innate desire for discounts on the first principle of human behavior: acquisition(retention, consumption). This principle manifests as ‘the greatest return in the shortest time with the least effort, with the greatest certainty, at the lowest risk.’ This manifests in our bodily economy. In our neural economy. in our behavioral economy. in our social economy. in our political economy. In other words, we’re all looking for discounts. And some of us are looking for ‘cheats’. In other words, whether ideas, beliefs, ideologies, philosophies, religions, hyperconsumption, or drugs we seek to obtain discounts on existence ‘cheats’. One of those cheats is metaphysical. It is the equivalent of the hunter-gatherer imagining the undiscovered valley full of rivers, greenery and fresh game. And nothing more.

    (more…)

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 17:56:00 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107644751758704966

  • Accumulation vs Dissipation

    Accumulation vs Dissipation

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-12 18:29:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481332412864942081

    Reply addressees: @gaiawriter

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481331788442398720

  • This is one of those things that requires a little explanation. The simple answe

    This is one of those things that requires a little explanation. The simple answe

    This is one of those things that requires a little explanation. The simple answer is ‘yes’ but I don’t know what that will mean to you. The universe computes stable relations (‘cooperation’) between differences. Any stable relation in the triangle captures capital (gain). https://t.co/W8eMoro9rh

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-12 03:59:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481113481327824897

    Reply addressees: @Logos_Elect @dandy_dreams

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481110110743285760

  • The physics (and economics) of self-organizing (fractal) matter, suggest that li

    The physics (and economics) of self-organizing (fractal) matter, suggest that life in the universe would be recognizable and explicable given the environment it involved in. Permuting environments of possible self-organization dictates forms. The universe produces narrow windows.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-01-04 18:35:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478435055798304768

  • Coligano’s paper is a bit of sophistry that categorically reframes a consequence

    Coligano’s paper is a bit of sophistry that categorically reframes a consequence as a cause. Like I said: Evasion of Evidence, Pilpul (sophistry), Critique (undermining), unwarrantability, plausible deniability, violation of formal science, scarcity, incentives, evolution.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-12-14 16:09:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470788037055598596

    Reply addressees: @shituationist @IanAdelstein @phl43

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470782871061336075

  • The right question. The difference is premises and presumptions. (a) axioms are

    The right question. The difference is premises and presumptions. (a) axioms are arbitrary and declared: primacy of rules, (b) laws are extant and discovered: primacy of premises. Therefore (c), is any logic justificationary? Or are all logics falsificationary?And falsifying what?

    Source date (UTC): 2021-12-14 15:12:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470773648411832323

    Reply addressees: @amor_fati_ke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470771865929007109

  • BACKGROUND: The marginalists were applying the calculus to human behavior and pr

    BACKGROUND: The marginalists were applying the calculus to human behavior and prices. When Marx discovered their work, and that their work invalidated the labor theory of value, he worked on pseudoscience to undermine it. Marx stopped writing but didn’t recant b/c he needed $$.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-12-13 14:09:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470395372669386763

    Reply addressees: @phl43

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470083987888611328

  • RE: Science and Prediction: One need only predict what data will say – explanato

    RE: Science and Prediction: One need only predict what data will say – explanatory power. Why? One can predict trends but not events. The physical universe can’t choose. Conscious life forms predict, choose, and continuously adapt in a chaotic competition. Explanation is enough.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-12-11 14:16:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1469672444877324294

  • more continued … Anyone can read the word of god written in his hand in the la

    … more continued …

    Anyone can read the word of god written in his hand in the laws of the universe. Anything that disagrees with those laws (See Thomas Aquinas) is false.

    The source material is the laws of the universe. I’m just looking at the science. That is what it says.

    I didn’t interpret anything. It’s just there.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-12-08 21:46:20 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107413502704802824

    Replying to: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107413499761642722

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtd

    UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE FAITHFUL GOD SPOKE ONE WORD “EVOLVE!” – EVOLUTION IS GODS FIRST LAW — “I think the key point of natural law is that there is a God who ordered the world and human affairs and that we ought to follow that order. The main problem of the west now is they no longer believe that there is a Creator God, so the rest is nonsense to them.” — That is the religious version. The secular is that whether a god exists or not there are extant laws of the universe, that we can discover, adapt to, and evolve using, or we can ignore those laws at our peril. It’s the same argument secular(deterministic) or religious(intentional). The universe is Darwinian, if god spoke he needed to say only one word: ‘evolve’ and there is only evidence of that one word. Christianity is just the optimum means of tolerating it. And Aryanism is the only one willing to face it. Evolution’s not random. The overarching order is that only by continuous recursive evolution do we defeat the red queen (entropy). Even the universe can die. Evolution: “Negative Entropy: Evolutionary computation, by continuous recursive disambiguation, of available energy, into persistence, consisting of stable relations, and the consequence we call mass.” Anything that can be computed will be computed. But the only means of increasing computation is increasing opportunity for computation which means increasing complexity. Some evolve into niches. Our niche has evolved to be evolution itself. The Laws of nature evolved into the Natural Law of Cooperation: the maximization of evolutionary computation by the reciprocal insurance of self-determination by self-determined means by sovereignty in demonstrated interests, reciprocity in display, word, and deed, and markets for voluntary cooperation in everything. The laws of nature and nature’s god are rather obvious. Time is not endless, it is not cyclical, it is not linear, it is only evolutionary – or else it’s death. Natural Selection consists of the accumulation of defects such that one is no longer competent for self-determination by self-determined means, and by suppression of their reproduction their genes are removed from the sexual marketplace and therefore the polity. The only cost of those markets is the suppression of the reproduction of those unfit for those markets in compensation for their care because of their unfitness. That is the only solution to the gods law of evolution. So that means that while others may insure you that you may not reproduce and thereby spread those defects. In other words, you had no choice in your creation but you have a choice in the spread of your harms. Ergo the violation of god’s law of evolution. I can only testify to the laws of the universe. That is all I testify to. The Indo Europeans discovered the primacy of man, the laws of nature and the tragedy of the laws of god(s). The Christians merely told how to survive them: love. … more …

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107413499761642722