Hell, maybe God caused it, and
I'm Satan for having written it.
Hell, maybe God caused it, and
I'm Satan for having written it.
DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
Whether Holmes is correct or
not depends on our assumptions.
Because of how unique everything is in the bigger picture, the statistical
probability of any real (whole) event occuring is either zero or one divided by infinity, which means zero is
the limit.
Which is the case depends on whether you assume every event is the combination of known and knowable
aspects of reality only, no matter how unique it is, which yields the latter, since there are infinite combinations
of known and knowable aspects of reality.
In other words, it is either mathematically true that every reality is
either infinitely improbable; or else true by all knowable logic that every event is literally (by human concepts)
impossible until the very moment it occurs, when only that is event is now possible.
The latter state
of affairs would be more humorous, go a step beyond Holmes, and be compatible with a certain theory of quantum
physics. It also relies on fewer assumptions, and therefore gets my vote. So I guess I'm inclined to disagree with
the Inspector, and to consider the "impossible" as well as the "possible" -- even before the possible, at times.
Pragmatically speaking; too often the line between "impossible" and "merely unimaginable for me at the moment" is
too blurred in human thinking, is it not?
Last edited by DrSmellThis; 05-20-2007 at 03:06 PM.
DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)
For all practical purposes we
can assume some events are so improbable as to be classed as impossible. We have to treat that varying grey area of
what can actually be expected to occur versus what might, in some remote possibility to occur. For the intent of
Holmes' statement we can assume certain events as impossible in our frame of reference. For example a person is
unlikely in the extreme to be in two disparate locations simultaneously. We could safely eliminate that as
impossible in our frame of reality. Under the theory of quantum mechanics it may well be possible. That's a
theoretical problem that has many possible solutions. However, it is theory with little application to the day to da
world we live in.
Yes, the demarcation between impossible and unimaginable at the moment is far too blurred to
even be considered a line. Rather, you should look at it as a cloud of variable possibilities if you want a better
grasp of the universe around us. I didn't say it would be a good grasp, only better than one that deals with black
and white or with dividing lines.
That's an interesting thought about impossible and unimaginable. What was
impossible 50 years ago was merely difficult or hard to imagine 25 years ago and is now commonplace. In the end, do
the terms possible and impossible have any real meaning?
Rather complex for a spin off of some tongue in cheek
remarks made off the cuff on a Sunday, isn't it? Making my poor little brain hurt.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks