what if paradox

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:45:18 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:01:24 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
Dr. Dingaling Ph.D wrote,

The only thing I really like to shrink is
ignorance.

Heya O all-wise and all-knowing one, there's a coupla questions
that
have been asked of all the other members of Darla's 'Commitee'.
They
all
drew a blank. Big fat goose egg. Mebbe you can enlighten us, being
as
how you're an ages-old spacefarer endowed with the deep secrets of
the
cosmos.

1. What is the nature of space (not a description, but the
_defining
explanation_ of _what space is_)?
2. What is the causal mechanism of gravity (not a description of
its
effects, i.e., equations, metrics and 'curvature'), but the
_explanation
of its causation_?

Certainly this is kindergarden stuff to your accrued wisdom, doc.

oc


Of course, and you have already been answered.


Er, where has he been answered?, he hasn't.

Yes, he has been answered.

Where???

Put up or shut up.

If I were not incapable of feeling fear, you'd be scaring the hell out of me
at this point.
Do you even bother to read the entire answer?
Or do you just stop reading when its convenient for you?
As I said the "where" is this newsgroup, alt.astronomy, right here, right
here, right here in this newsgroup.

Do learn to read properly or sod off.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

Art Deco wrote:
Dr. Yubiwan wrote:

"Charles D. Bohne" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:19:07 GMT, "Dr. Yubiwan"
wrote:

Hi, kookers -- here's some work for you.
HTH.C

You are at one and the same time, Mr. Bohne, a Janus-faced "stotting
tommie", and a confounded, blithering idiot.

Yet, you do have a few redeeming negative traits as well.
If you would like me to address these, just ask.

You are a boon to the skeptics of your species.
Keep up the great needlework!

D. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

Looks like this guy has Chuckweasel pegged to a tee.

IAWTP
--
ah

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:05:44 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:45:18 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:01:24 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
Dr. Dingaling Ph.D wrote,

The only thing I really like to shrink is
ignorance.

Heya O all-wise and all-knowing one, there's a coupla questions
that
have been asked of all the other members of Darla's 'Commitee'.
They
all
drew a blank. Big fat goose egg. Mebbe you can enlighten us, being
as
how you're an ages-old spacefarer endowed with the deep secrets of
the
cosmos.

1. What is the nature of space (not a description, but the
_defining
explanation_ of _what space is_)?
2. What is the causal mechanism of gravity (not a description of
its
effects, i.e., equations, metrics and 'curvature'), but the
_explanation
of its causation_?

Certainly this is kindergarden stuff to your accrued wisdom, doc.

oc


Of course, and you have already been answered.


Er, where has he been answered?, he hasn't.

Yes, he has been answered.

Where???

Put up or shut up.

If I were not incapable of feeling fear, you'd be scaring the hell out of me
at this point.
Do you even bother to read the entire answer?
Or do you just stop reading when its convenient for you?
As I said the "where" is this newsgroup, alt.astronomy, right here, right
here, right here in this newsgroup.

Do learn to read properly or sod off.

Ah so he hasn't been answered then, and you can't show otherwise.

Bloody fake doctors and aliens.


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D. One Big Loser

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:21:23 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:


Snip


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.



Have not quite got the hang of this have you, you do realise that there is no need to use the 'Ph.D' after your name as it is implied by the title you use of 'Dr.'

These newbies are a scream. Now how much did you pay for that bit of paper??

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:07:14 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Luigi Caselli" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Yubiwan" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote in message
...
"Luigi Caselli" wrote in message
...

Small means that in our universe you can have only one reality.
So anything is not possibly and not likely. Life conditions are
limited.

In a multiverse solution you can have infinite realities... and in
this
theory you can say that (almost) anything is possibly or likely in
some
of
these universes.
And there's no need to claim that we won an incredibly unlikely
lottery.
With infinite tickets someone (us) took the right one...

In the biggest lottery in Italy you have only 1 on 625.000.000
possibility
to win.
But selling millions of tickets every extraction someone every 10-20
times
wins.
If they sell only one ticket it's a bit more difficult to win...

Our universe fine tuning conditions are a lot more unlikely...
So you really need lots of tickets (universes)...

Luigi Caselli



The belief in a multiverse, founded by neither evidence, observation
nor
logic, is a manifestation of a human being's search and striving for
the
absolutely deepest level of inferiority complex possible to attain.

IOW, those with inferiority complexes were overjoyed each time a
discovery
was made which increased the perceived size of the Universe.

Now that your science has taken you about as far as it can take you in
terms
of the size of the observable Universe, people like you keep the trend
going
with your imaginations.

You envision either an infinitely large Universe or an infinite set of
Universes in order to make yourself feel as small as you can possibly
feel.

This then justifies your overwhelming and decidedly overbearing sense
of
superiority over other people.

If you are not already seeing a psychologist, I would certainly like
to
take
a closer look at you, if you don't mind.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.



And may I add that a belief that you are a simulation is also related to
your feelings of smallness, of helplessness, of inferiority.

The only reason you choose rather to believe in an infinite multiverse
is
simply because this makes you feel even smaller than you would feel if
you
accepted the simulation hypothesis.

You are encouraged to begin a study of the small.

When you have studied down into the Planck area for awhile, then see
where
your imagination takes you.

If you think simulation and multiversing is humbling, just wait until
you
envision the constituent makeup of subatomic "particles".

Only then will you experience--and exhibit--behavioral humility.

Only then will you begin to sense true balance.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

Again, simulation theory is not my theory, you can read about it at
http://www.simulation-argument.com
Why don't you talk about it with Nick Bostrom? I think it would be
interesting...

Yes, Mr. Caselli, we are aware of the theory, its creator and all its
believers.


Did you know he used to be a stand up comedian, tis true.

And his PhD is in fact real, unlike yours, and he achieved the highest
level grades in his country, quite an achievement

Dr. Bostrum is enjoying his talent, and his influence is spreading, albeit
slowly.

Yeah but these peeps are *real* PhD's, you can't just dismiss it.

He should be commended for his work, as some of it is quite genius.

Absolutely, a genius.

But the simulation argument is easily refuted and will be soundly put to
rest very soon.

If that were the case the argument would not be spreading and would have
died a death by now. Trouble is, it can't be so easily dismissed as can
be noted by some of the names now putting it forward as a serious proposal. Again I remind you that these peeps are *real* PhD's in their
respective fields. You are not.


Or you can read at
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...358588,00.html that some
other
people are talking about it.

Anyway I think multiverse theory is more scientific and less weird (and
maybe scaring) than simulation theory.
So I like it more.

I have already explained why you like it more.
Accepting this reason is your next step toward balance and enlightenment.

But if you're sure that by chance we're wonderfully leaving in a universe
so
right for us, well for you...
It's so good living without doubts...

Luigi Caselli



Always doubt, be ever the skeptic.
For this is one jumping board to great knowledge and wisdom.

The universe actually appears so wrong for us--for all of us--all of life.
Yet life manages to exist virtually everywhere in the galaxy and probably
the entire universe.
It is so difficult to accept and believe that you are "larger than life".
Yet you must, and you will.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:05:44 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:45:18 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:01:24 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
Dr. Dingaling Ph.D wrote,

The only thing I really like to shrink is
ignorance.

Heya O all-wise and all-knowing one, there's a coupla
questions
that
have been asked of all the other members of Darla's
'Commitee'.
They
all
drew a blank. Big fat goose egg. Mebbe you can enlighten us,
being
as
how you're an ages-old spacefarer endowed with the deep
secrets of
the
cosmos.

1. What is the nature of space (not a description, but the
_defining
explanation_ of _what space is_)?
2. What is the causal mechanism of gravity (not a description
of
its
effects, i.e., equations, metrics and 'curvature'), but the
_explanation
of its causation_?

Certainly this is kindergarden stuff to your accrued wisdom,
doc.

oc


Of course, and you have already been answered.


Er, where has he been answered?, he hasn't.

Yes, he has been answered.

Where???

Put up or shut up.

If I were not incapable of feeling fear, you'd be scaring the hell out
of me
at this point.
Do you even bother to read the entire answer?
Or do you just stop reading when its convenient for you?
As I said the "where" is this newsgroup, alt.astronomy, right here,
right
here, right here in this newsgroup.

Do learn to read properly or sod off.

Ah so he hasn't been answered then, and you can't show otherwise.

Bloody fake doctors and aliens.


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D. One Big Loser



Now is This the best you can do?
Are you too confounded by search engines to be able to research this?
Are you 12 years old?

(This is just a mental-age assessment.
If your chronological age is 24, then your IQ is 50; if your calendar age is
36, then your IQ would be 33, and so forth.)

Mr. Vingnutte, are you high?
How about some more of those interesting astronomy posts?
Or are you having too much fun blowing this flaming, off-topic smoke up my
itty-bitty butt?

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:00:38 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:05:44 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:45:18 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:01:24 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
Dr. Dingaling Ph.D wrote,

The only thing I really like to shrink is
ignorance.

Heya O all-wise and all-knowing one, there's a coupla
questions
that
have been asked of all the other members of Darla's
'Commitee'.
They
all
drew a blank. Big fat goose egg. Mebbe you can enlighten us,
being
as
how you're an ages-old spacefarer endowed with the deep
secrets of
the
cosmos.

1. What is the nature of space (not a description, but the
_defining
explanation_ of _what space is_)?
2. What is the causal mechanism of gravity (not a description
of
its
effects, i.e., equations, metrics and 'curvature'), but the
_explanation
of its causation_?

Certainly this is kindergarden stuff to your accrued wisdom,
doc.

oc


Of course, and you have already been answered.


Er, where has he been answered?, he hasn't.

Yes, he has been answered.

Where???

Put up or shut up.

If I were not incapable of feeling fear, you'd be scaring the hell out
of me
at this point.
Do you even bother to read the entire answer?
Or do you just stop reading when its convenient for you?
As I said the "where" is this newsgroup, alt.astronomy, right here,
right
here, right here in this newsgroup.

Do learn to read properly or sod off.

Ah so he hasn't been answered then, and you can't show otherwise.

Bloody fake doctors and aliens.


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D. One Big Loser



Now is This the best you can do?
Are you too confounded by search engines to be able to research this?
Are you 12 years old?

(This is just a mental-age assessment.
If your chronological age is 24, then your IQ is 50; if your calendar age is
36, then your IQ would be 33, and so forth.)

Mr. Vingnutte, are you high?

No, I suffer from virtigo..

How about some more of those interesting astronomy posts?
Or are you having too much fun blowing this flaming, off-topic smoke up my
itty-bitty butt?

Ah trying to get round me now eh?, won't work John, just won't work.


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:07:14 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:

"Luigi Caselli" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Yubiwan" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote in message
...
"Luigi Caselli" wrote in
message
...

Small means that in our universe you can have only one reality.
So anything is not possibly and not likely. Life conditions are
limited.

In a multiverse solution you can have infinite realities... and
in
this
theory you can say that (almost) anything is possibly or likely
in
some
of
these universes.
And there's no need to claim that we won an incredibly unlikely
lottery.
With infinite tickets someone (us) took the right one...

In the biggest lottery in Italy you have only 1 on 625.000.000
possibility
to win.
But selling millions of tickets every extraction someone every
10-20
times
wins.
If they sell only one ticket it's a bit more difficult to win...

Our universe fine tuning conditions are a lot more unlikely...
So you really need lots of tickets (universes)...

Luigi Caselli



The belief in a multiverse, founded by neither evidence,
observation
nor
logic, is a manifestation of a human being's search and striving
for
the
absolutely deepest level of inferiority complex possible to
attain.

IOW, those with inferiority complexes were overjoyed each time a
discovery
was made which increased the perceived size of the Universe.

Now that your science has taken you about as far as it can take
you in
terms
of the size of the observable Universe, people like you keep the
trend
going
with your imaginations.

You envision either an infinitely large Universe or an infinite
set of
Universes in order to make yourself feel as small as you can
possibly
feel.

This then justifies your overwhelming and decidedly overbearing
sense
of
superiority over other people.

If you are not already seeing a psychologist, I would certainly
like
to
take
a closer look at you, if you don't mind.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.



And may I add that a belief that you are a simulation is also
related to
your feelings of smallness, of helplessness, of inferiority.

The only reason you choose rather to believe in an infinite
multiverse
is
simply because this makes you feel even smaller than you would feel
if
you
accepted the simulation hypothesis.

You are encouraged to begin a study of the small.

When you have studied down into the Planck area for awhile, then see
where
your imagination takes you.

If you think simulation and multiversing is humbling, just wait
until
you
envision the constituent makeup of subatomic "particles".

Only then will you experience--and exhibit--behavioral humility.

Only then will you begin to sense true balance.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

Again, simulation theory is not my theory, you can read about it at
http://www.simulation-argument.com
Why don't you talk about it with Nick Bostrom? I think it would be
interesting...

Yes, Mr. Caselli, we are aware of the theory, its creator and all its
believers.


Did you know he used to be a stand up comedian, tis true.

See there, Mr. Vingnutte, you Can do research when you want to.
This was some years ago, '97, IIRC.
He'll be able to take his simulation ideas on the road soon.

And his PhD is in fact real, unlike yours, and he achieved the highest
level grades in his country, quite an achievement

You have no basis to say that my doctorate is not real.
Choose your words carefully, as I'm feeling feisty and I'm quite good!

Dr. Bostrum is enjoying his talent, and his influence is spreading,
albeit
slowly.

Yeah but these peeps are *real* PhD's, you can't just dismiss it.

Of course I can dismiss it if it is untrue.
And I do dismiss it.
Ph.D.s do not constitute an automatic ability to monopolize truth, you
moron.

He should be commended for his work, as some of it is quite genius.

Absolutely, a genius.

But the simulation argument is easily refuted and will be soundly put to
rest very soon.

If that were the case the argument would not be spreading and would have
died a death by now.

Like for example, your "Big Bang" theory of the origin of the universe? hmm?

Both theories are manifestations of the common human low esteem.
You are too ignorant to comprehend infinity, so all must have a beginning
and an end.
You want to "go out like a lamb" or IOW, you want to die peacefully in bed,
so you want the beginning to "come in like a lion" and be a very nearly
incomprehensible BANG!!!

Of course the fact that none of you can explain the universe prior to the
Big Bang rolls merrily and nonsensibly off your ducky backs.

What a crock some of you can be.

Trouble is, it can't be so easily dismissed as can
be noted by some of the names now putting it forward as a serious
proposal. Again I remind you that these peeps are *real* PhD's in their
respective fields. You are not.

And your mother can't boil water, lout.

If you have a life to get back to, I do hope you go soon.
With all due respect, Mr. Vingnutte, you're beginning to bore the hell out
of me.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:21:23 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:


Snip


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.



Have not quite got the hang of this have you, you do realise that there is
no need to use the 'Ph.D' after your name as it is implied by the title
you use of 'Dr.'

These newbies are a scream. Now how much did you pay for that bit of
paper??

It's called "overcompensation" I suspect "Yubiwan" is nothing more than a
checkout charlie or a janitor.

"Ray Vingnutte" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:21:23 GMT
"Dr. Yubiwan" wrote:


Snip


Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.



Have not quite got the hang of this have you, you do realise that there is
no need to use the 'Ph.D' after your name as it is implied by the title you
use of 'Dr.'

That is correct and customary, not to be denied.
Amazing how one would even notice that my usage is unconventional.

Oh!

SHUT
UP !!!

.. . . it's you, Mr. Vingnutte.
No further explanation needed.

I have my reasons for including both nomenclatures with my name, Mr.
Vingnutte.
And while unconventional, this practice is not entirely unheard of on your
planet.
Many of my esteemed colleagues use this format when signing letters and
such.

Only poorly informed idjits such as yourself would consider the practice
overly pompous or juvenile.

Dr. Yubiwan, Ph.D.