Close

Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: This is...

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8727

    Default

    Hell, maybe God caused it, and

    I'm Satan for having written it.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  2. #2
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8577

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrSmellThis View Post
    Hell,

    maybe God caused it, and I'm Satan for having written it.
    That's always possible. While I don't support

    that notion we mustn't discount any possibility. Was it Sherlock Holmes that said "When you eliminate the

    impossible, what remains, no matter how improbable, is the answer." or something like that?
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  3. #3
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8727

    Default

    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)

  4. #4
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8577

    Default

    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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •