I guess that's part of what I'm asking. How do we know that it is a black hole in it's own frame of reference? How do we know that what we think of as it's frame of reference isn't wrong?
As I understand it, if you are moving fast enough relative to me, your mass increase will cause you to APPEAR like a black hole to me, even though you will not see yourself as a black hole. It would be an illusion, right? And also you would see me as a black hole while I would reject that view...
Ok I read the links. That's pretty cool - it's coming together now. Ok so max entropy (or high enough entropy to form a black hole) would cause a black hole to form, which would immediately crush the arrangement of matter which caused it into a point with no entropy. But then that would violate...
Go easy, not an expert.
My intuition tells me that the maximum possible entropy in a given space is going to coincide with the arrangement requiring the most information to describe it. Let me know if this is wrong.
Ok, so now what I want to know is what an actual arrangement like this...
Of course, but it's too little too late. We need to vastly cut taxes across the board. Eliminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and hundreds of other agencies. Close foreign military bases. Abolish the Fed and fiat monetary system. Balance the budget and pay OFF the debt. Charities will...
Macro *is* micro -- just for a longer period of time. They are the same thing. Ask him what happens if a wolf "micro-evolves" repeatedly until it looks like a walrus. Would he still call it a wolf?
That's one reason you might be able to tell if you were in one. What if it's running slower than you suggest, but fast enough that you can't tell the difference normally? If that's the case and you can manage to construct an experiment sensitive enough, you might see that the particle was...
Modeling imagination seems like it could be done. How about modeling creativity? What if you have it to throw out random cancepts/situations/problems that are at first glance probably unrelated to the problem at hand, and then have it look for similarities between them. It also examines the...
Seems like there are maybe two aspects to consciousness.
Let's say I'm a major league ballplayer and I'm at bat. I am laser focused on the pitcher and the ball. So your focus is narrow but deep. You don't notice anything else around you. You are more conscious of the pitcher, but less about...
That's the interesting part to me. Many of the interesting problem may be solved using ideas we haven't even thought of. It has to be able to invent or evolve new models and new math. What if you have it throw out random groupings of axioms and structures and have it analyze the consequences of...
What do you mean about it being repeated? Maybe you mean afterlife? I don't think there is one but even if there was it wouldn't be a restart. It would be a continuation subjectively.
That's the best explanation we have.
Sure...but it's just degrees of complexity, not something new. To classify it as altogether different muddies the waters.
Since everything is made of quarks and electrons, why use the word "life"?
Everything is just physics including "life" so why not present it that way? It's all interacting particles, some interactions are just more complex than others. Why categorize things as living or non-living? What does it...