42, but what is the question?
"When asked to produce The Ultimate Question, Deep Thought says that it cannot; however, it can help to design an even more powerful computer that can.
This new computer will incorporate living beings into the "computational matrix" and will run for ten million years. It is revealed as being the planet Earth,"
Anyone facny a bite at The Restaurant at the End of the Universe? or maybe a meet there?![]()
Is it me... or is:
"The theory basically goes that any civilisation which could evolve to a 'post-human' stage would almost certainly learn to run simulations on the scale of a universe. And that given the size of reality - billions of worlds, around billions of suns - it is fairly likely that if this is possible, it has already happened."
So painfully contradictory?
Skip forward to where Brian Greene 08:00 comes on.
Oh goodness, Brian Greene - the man who continually pushes string theory despite it still basically being untestable and thus not really contending as a proper scientific theory. So much time and effort has been spent on string theory, and yet it is flawed from the start. Sure it's a mathematically beautiful and elegant theory, but it's predictions cannot be reasonably tested, there are infinite variation of the actual theory, every time an observation seems to disagree with it the theories are altered... Ugh, of course I may be wrong and it may be a step in the right direction to a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) but it doesn't seem like it at the moment. We should continue looking at alternative contenders like Loop Quantum mavity and Supersymmetry (SUSY).
Anyway, sorry for that... I get very passionate about particle physics and quantum mechanics, probably shows that I'm a bit mental but then I am doing a physics degree so...
Oh goodness, Brian Greene - the man who continually pushes string theory despite it still basically being untestable and thus not really contending as a proper scientific theory. So much time and effort has been spent on string theory, and yet it is flawed from the start. Sure it's a mathematically beautiful and elegant theory, but it's predictions cannot be reasonably tested, there are infinite variation of the actual theory, every time an observation seems to disagree with it the theories are altered... Ugh, of course I may be wrong and it may be a step in the right direction to a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) but it doesn't seem like it at the moment. We should continue looking at alternative contenders like Loop Quantum mavity and Supersymmetry (SUSY).
Anyway, sorry for that... I get very passionate about particle physics and quantum mechanics, probably shows that I'm a bit mental but then I am doing a physics degree so...
Well yeah, of course once an observation is made that is counter to a theory, the theory will change accordingly, thats how science works... I prefer it over SUSY, but have yet to have a proper look at the quantum mavity theories.
Well if you watch the video you'd see he's trying to get away from string theory. String theory, dark matter, supersymmetry and all that stuff becomes irrelevant from the information theory perspective, with entropic mavity.
Edit: didn't mean quantum mavity I meant entropic mavity.
Good to see, I'll watch the video later. But, "entropic mavity"? I've never heard of such a phenomenon before, I shall have to look that up.
Quick, someone divide by zero!
Let's all do it.. At the same time :O
nice uptime