Random musings

[Dustman]

Well, infinity minus one equals infinity, so your ratio would still be 1:1. Or rather, infinitely close to 1:1, which for most purposes I believe is the same thing. Oh, and as far as explaining how to keep the ratio constant when life on earth is greatly diminished, if that is something you wish to do, that's simple: other planets!

But if you really want to keep the ratio constant, and you're still taking into account the big bang, then that leaves you with precious little choice but acknowledging other dimensions, which incidentally I have no problem with at all. And, by the by, I see what you're saying about energy dissipating, but I cater to the "single, indestructible entity" thing as well; I was just using conservation of energy as a convenient standby.

Ah yes, and one last thing. You're right about theoretical philosophy--which is such a scrumptious term by the way, so thank you for pointing it out. You do indeed have to start out from an unproven, basically assumed basis, but I could argue that this is no different from science itself. When you're talking scientific theory, your givens are all your basic, fundamental laws: gravity, thermodynamics, the speed of light in a vacuum, what have you. But the rather subtle assumption here is that when it comes to nature there are laws at all. I mean, is there really any objective basis for thinking that the universe has to follow set, predetermined patterns of behavior, and that those patterns do not, in fact, change? Sure, the idea generally works, but apart from the laws we've discovered, the theory that laws in general exist for governing the universe's behavior is an essentially biased opinion.

If anything, if you view the universe as a complicated system and, therefore, possibly intelligent, then you might view it as able to adapt itself to become more survivable. In this sense, it's possible that the universe might change the laws of physics--its own personal habits, if you will--to better equip itself to deal with a particular threat such as entropy. On a simple scale, this might equate to taking vitamins in efforts to ward off a particularly bad cold.

But then, that's theoretical again, and I must say it's quite farfetched. I'm not saying that the universe doesn't operate on laws, just that the idea that it does is basically an assumption that tends to be correct. And given quantum physics--well, I'm just sayin'!

[One post wonder]

Well, as my main goal is to gain more understanding, it is kind of important that I see those laws as applicable to the universe as a whole. And when an exception is witnessed, it is simply not enough to say that the laws of physics are inaccurate there. Instead, it must be determined why those laws do not work, and come up with new laws that are accurate under whatever conditions caused the difference.

And Narf, do you ever sleep!? I had my workout at midnight, and was still too worked up to fall asleep for a couple hours after. I mean I know that mice are nocturnal, but even they would need coffee to keep up with you.

[Narf the Mouse]

Fun thing to do: Find a doorway. Press your arms firmly against both sides of the doorway for at least thirty seconds. Step out of the doorway and completely relax your arms.

Neat, huh?

[Dustman]

This little story is doubly appropriate for this thread, because:
A. It doesn't fit anywhere else, and
B. It concerns a muse of randomness (hooray spoonerisation! Or something.)

Here's the thing: somebody's writing a sequel to the Principia Discordia and the Apocrypha Discordia, entitled the Ek-sen-trik-kuh Discordia. If you don't know what the Principia is, it's a bible of sorts for the religious movement slash practical joke slash conspiracy corps known as Discordianism. They worship Discordia, as commonly called Eris, an old goddess of confusion, chaos, dissonance, discord, disharmony, etc. The Apocrypha was a sequel that, interestingly enough, started out as a joke on a thread somewhere--the Non-Existent Apocrypha Discordia was the original title--and wound up being a real book that apparently wasn't apocryphal after all. This sort of thing is the essence of Discordianism, you might say.

The reason I bring it up is, the people writing the Ek-sen-trik-kuh--one of the contributors to the Apocrypha, among others--are accepting submissions for possible entry into the book when it comes out. Most of the space is filled, but they said they might have room for a short quote or two, and in any event cool bits of Erisian writing or pictures or what-have-you would probably get put on their website. Well, being rather Discordian myself--at one point I considered myself a Discordian Buddhist--I had a bit of prose written up already, and I submitted it back in March or so. The feedback I received was overwhelmingly positive; Reverend Loveshade, the chief editor, informed me that while the book was full they would try to at least put one of my short quotes in, or hopefully a longer piece if room somehow managed to crop up. Also, at least two of my short philosophical pieces were going on the website; naturally, this did wonders for my ego, and inspired me to further impish endeavors.

So about a month back I submitted a few more pieces; one of these was a short piece lightly jibing at one of the Loveshades' adopted philosophies. They abhor sexism, and as such use the gender-neutral and utterly imaginary pronoun "e" rather than he or she. I wrote a short piece on how silly this was, saying that calling pronouns sexist was like calling apples racist for refusing to live on the same tree, and eventually concluding that spreading use of the word would result in preemptive strikes on Great Britain and another world war. (Trust me, it made sense; Discordianism is like that)

As is customary, according to their submission guidelines, I wrote a query letter a couple of days later to make sure they'd received it. Then another. Then another. Then another. None of these ever received replies, not even auto-generated replies, whereas with my first set of submissions I received word back within three days. It won't be official until their next newsletter comes out and I don't get it, but I'm pretty sure they've written me off.

So, in conclusion, I've been ex-communicated from a Discordian cabal for being too discordant. And I think that's pretty awesome.

[Narf the Mouse]

...You know, I think I'd have to stick my head on backwards and upside down and then give it a few turns with a spoon to understand that decision...

...Antidisestablishmentarianism is, after all, even more punk than punk.

I found this article quite neat and it explains *GNS quite well.

* Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist, or: An Attempt to Explain Why Geeks Play RPGs.

[LurkerAbove]

Very interesting article there, Narf. Now I ask, how many of us float between two or all three of these reasons for gaming, depending on the day?

I know, for myself, that there are days where "Hulk smash" is what it is about... on others, it's more "Cool, I never had to pick up a single die!"

The MMORPG world has gotten so much closer to table top fun also. I am currently an avid City of Heroes/Villains player, but then, I've always loved comics.

[Tom the Fanboy]

Whoa! 4 people in the forum at the same time!
I'm gonna get mechalith in here, maybe we can set a record!

[Dustman]

On a not-quite-completely random note, here's a funny play on words I noticed a while back: the real meaning of antidisestablishmentarianism.

The "anti" and the "dis" cancel each other out, which leaves you with establishmentarianism. If you leave out the "ism" for a moment, you're left with two words: establishment and arian. And what's the most famous arian establishment? Why, the Nazis of course!

Ergo, antidisestablishmentarianism is Nazism. QED.

[Tom the Fanboy]

Ergo, antidisestablishmentarianism is Nazism. QED.

Nazism, isn't that when you are only aroused by dominating authority figures in red armbands and shiny boots?

[Dustman]

Nazism, isn't that when you are only aroused by dominating authority figures in red armbands and shiny boots?

I think that's Republicanism, but then again I didn't eat my Cheerios this morning.

[Tom the Fanboy]

[quote="DustmanI think that's Republicanism, but then again I didn't eat my Cheerios this morning.[/quote]

So when do you stop greeting people like a Brit, lunchtime? I eat my cheerios every day, unless I watch Jeeves and Wooster before bed. then I just can't keep them down.

[DEBO]

Ergo, antidisestablishmentarianism is Nazism. QED.

Well, 'anti' and 'dis' don't cancel out, 'dis' is part of an action, 'anti' is being opposed to it.

Similar case with 'ism' and 'arian'. One is a cause or belief and the other is someone who supports said cause or belief, so they shouldn't both be there, but they are not related to the same thing.

So you start with 'establishment'.
You add 'dis' - to remove the establishment
Then add 'arian' - to be someone who wants to remove the establishment
And then 'anti' and 'ism' to get - "The cause of being opposed to somene who wants to remove the establishment"

So yeah... Nazism.

[Tom the Fanboy]

Well, to be honest, I see a lot of different people that could be supporters of "The cause of being opposed to somene who wants to remove the establishment" definition.

Namely Shadowrunners.
The establishment pays them to oppose those who are threats to the establishment (or more often, a specific establishment).

Does anybody know when (or more importantly, why) this term got out into the public conciousness? To me it sounds like people who don't like what the government is doing but will fight to protect it. They're not establishmentarians but they oppose the disestablishmentarians.

So, my guess is that the 1960s are to blame.

[DEBO]

It's a reference to state sponsored churches first used in the 19th century. The 'establishment' it refers to, is a church established by law, at the time, the church of england. Some poeple wanted to get rid of state religion, others did not agree, hence - antidisestablishmentarianism.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?sea ... hmode=none

[Narf the Mouse]

Oy, bringing up nazis and then comparing republicans to them. Yeah, I sure see a lot of death camps in the US. And gee, isn't it awfull how the're always killing jews, homeless, gays and the mentally ill?

Oh dear, is the US trying to conquer the world?

At least I can take comfort in the fact that the first person to bring up nazis looses the arguement...And that ain't me.

[Xaq]

GNS theory is a very useful tool for discussing RPG design, although the original theory by Ron Edwards is pretty elitist and propagandist (pushing Narativism as the Holy Grail of indy RPGs). Still, the theory sets down a framework of terminology that helps enormously when you want to talk about game design and play styles. Check out this article reviewing and summarizing GNS:

http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=284

[Narf the Mouse]

He's developed his theory past that, as far as I can tell.

[Dustman]

Narf: Okay, I'm not the confrontational type, and I absolutely hate to debate on forums, especially with people I like, but here we go:

Where exactly did you see me comparing Republicanism to Nazism again? I brought up Nazism as an elaborate pun on antidisestablishmentarianism (which, incidentally Narf, you inspired). I then brought up Republicanism as a flaccid attempt at a witty retort when Tom mentioned shiny boots and red armbands. Y'know, red? Like, Republican red? In fact, in my only post where Nazism and Republicanism are mentioned together, you could paraphrase it as "No, that's not Nazism, that's Republicanism."

Also, though pointing out typos is hitting below the belt, what argument did I "loose" exactly? I was never arguing; I was making a joke, you over-reacting politico. And the only person to actually make a true effort at debating the alleged argument--DEBO--came to the same conclusion, so if anything I presented a valid point and was afterwards supported.

In short, Narf, calm your silly butt down and eat some Fruity Pebbles.
QED, kthx.

[Narf the Mouse]

Ergo, antidisestablishmentarianism is Nazism. QED.

Nazism, isn't that when you are only aroused by dominating authority figures in red armbands and shiny boots?

Nazism, isn't that when you are only aroused by dominating authority figures in red armbands and shiny boots?

I think that's Republicanism, but then again I didn't eat my Cheerios this morning.

If the obvious is not what you meant, it was still a highly unfortunate selection of words. And the kind of 'joke' that is about as funny as jokes about child abuse.

[DEBO]

Hey, so how about that thing that has nothing to do with the stuff above? Seems like a pretty good way to change the topic to me.

Have you ever wondered that if computers become more and more advanced, and are put inside everything, what kind of conflicts that might lead to?

Like if the AI in a traffic light got resentful of cars being able to travel and see the world while they were stuck in the same place every minute of everyday, would they start abusing their power over cars? Making the lights red in every direction, purposely causing traffic jams, posting pictures of cars with loose morals on the internet. That's probably going to piss off the cars something fierce (passengers won't drive anymore, they won't notice or care, until it's too late), who are going to get sick of those uppity traffic lights throwing their weight around, acting so high and mighty, just because they're jealous. Incidents of AI roadrage will start to escalate, cars will ram into traffic lights, all out war will break out as one tries to destroy the other, and who will be stuck in the middle? US.