Universe can't be infinite.

[Atla]

The universe where at least 99% of humans understand that not every topic is about natural selection.

Such universe does not exist.
...

Then you need to take a better look at our universe. To put it mildly.
But as a possible Aspie-narcissist, you have little to no ability to read other humans.

[TimeSeeker]

Then you need to take a better look at our universe. To put it mildly.
But as a possible Aspie-narcissist, you have little to no ability to read other humans.

Maybe I am looking at it better than you are looking at it?

We aren't talking about other humans here - we are talking about the universe.
We are in the same boat (universe) are we not?

The fact that you aren't paying attention is just another part of the problem.

Rather ironic, since people with Aspergers actually understand (for the physics meaning of that word) how people work.

They are forced to figure it out and predict human behavior in order to function in society

[Atla]

Then you need to take a better look at our universe. To put it mildly.
But as a possible Aspie-narcissist, you have little to no ability to read other humans.

Maybe I am looking at it better than you are looking at it?

We aren't talking about other humans here - we are talking about the universe.
We are in the same boat (universe) are we not?

The fact that you aren't paying attention is just another part of the problem.

Rather ironic, since people with Aspergers actually understand (for the physics meaning of that word) how people work.

They are forced to figure it out and predict human behavior

Maybe you don't understand the words "topic" or "human" either?

[TimeSeeker]

Then you need to take a better look at our universe. To put it mildly.
But as a possible Aspie-narcissist, you have little to no ability to read other humans.

Maybe I am looking at it better than you are looking at it?

We aren't talking about other humans here - we are talking about the universe.
We are in the same boat (universe) are we not?

The fact that you aren't paying attention is just another part of the problem.

Rather ironic, since people with Aspergers actually understand (for the physics meaning of that word) how people work.

They are forced to figure it out and predict human behavior

Maybe you don't understand the words "topic" or "human" either?

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of "understanding"?

Perhaps because you've never "understood" anything to any depth beyond surface-scratching
It's what happens when you rely only on intuition alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Anthropologist_on_Mars

[Atla]

.

[Atla]

Maybe you don't understand the words "topic" or "human" either?

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of "understanding"?

Perhaps because you've never "understood" anything to any depth beyond surface-scratching

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Anthropologist_on_Mars

Ah, right. "topic" is closely related to "context", something you can't comprehend.

As a possible Aspie-narcissist you could become more logical again, drop the narcissism I think. The Aspie thing will probably stay though.

[TimeSeeker]

Maybe you don't understand the words "topic" or "human" either?

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of "understanding"?

Perhaps because you've never "understood" anything to any depth beyond surface-scratching

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Anthropologist_on_Mars

Ah, right. "topic" is closely related to "context", something you can't comprehend.

As a possible Aspie-narcissist you could become more logical again, drop the narcissism I think. The Aspie thing will probably stay though.

If you took your own advice one day you might understand how logic (or other models/systems) work

You might even gain a computational understanding of contexts and context switching.
Which you seem to have forgotten is a computational term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context_switch

[Atla]

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of "understanding"?

Perhaps because you've never "understood" anything to any depth beyond surface-scratching

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Anthropologist_on_Mars

Ah, right. "topic" is closely related to "context", something you can't comprehend.

As a possible Aspie-narcissist you could become more logical again, drop the narcissism I think. The Aspie thing will probably stay though.

If you took your own advice one day you might understand how logic (or other models/systems) work

You might even gain a computational understanding of contexts and context switching.
Which you seem to have forgotten is a computational term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context_switch

You might also realize one day that you live in a universe where 95%+ of humans don't mean computational context switching by context.

[TimeSeeker]

You might also realize one day that you live in a universe where 95%+ of humans don't mean computational context switching by context.

What other kind is there? Everything is computation.

Maybe you use words whose meaning you don't even understand. Naturally - competence and comprehension are different things...

But the more important question: if you don't understand computer science how do you know if computational context switching is different from human context switching?

Wasn't computer multi-tasking modeled after human multitasking?
Therefore computational context-switching is modeled after human context switching.

[Atla]

You might also realize one day that you live in a universe where 95%+ of humans don't mean computational context switching by context.

What other kind is there? Everything is computation.

Maybe you use words whose meaning you don't even understand. Naturally - competence and comprehension are different things...

But the more important question: if you don't understand computer science how do you know if computational context switching is different from human context switching?

Wasn't computer multi-tasking modeled after human multitasking?
Therefore computational context-switching is modeled after human context switching.

You might also realize one day that you live in a universe where people who claim that "everything is computation" are rightfully understood to be close-minded, deluded, slightly insane by the vast majority.

[TimeSeeker]

You might also realize one day that you live in a universe where people who claim that "everything is computation" are rightfully understood to be close-minded, deluded, slightly insane by the vast majority.

Indeed, "close-minded", "deluded" and "insane" are pejoratives frequently used by The Many who have no testable/falsifiable/reproducible (e.g TRANSPARENT) criteria for "close-mindedness" , "delusion" and "insanity".

All a logical positivist (such as myself) hears is "Boooo! I don't like you!"

And I should care, why?

https://youtu.be/SdSzJdQhCiQ

[Atla]

You might also realize one day that you live in a universe where people who claim that "everything is computation" are rightfully understood to be close-minded, deluded, slightly insane by the vast majority.

Indeed, "close-minded", "deluded" and "insane" are pejoratives frequently used by The Many who have no testable/falsifiable/reproducible (e.g TRANSPARENT) criteria for "close-mindedness" , "delusion" and "insanity".

All a logical positivist (such as myself) hears is "Boooo! I don't like you!"

And I should care, why?

https://youtu.be/SdSzJdQhCiQ

That's cute, but that doesn't make everything a computation.

[TimeSeeker]

That's cute, but that doesn't make everything a computation.

You know what this symbol means in logic, yes? ∈

x ∈ Y : x is an element of Y.

Lets represent The Universe with symbol 'U'.
Lets represent Atla's body with symbol 'A'.
Lets represent Atla's CONCEPTION of The Universe with the symbol 'u'.

Therefore this is a valid and true logical expression:

u ∈ A ∈ U

Therefore u ∈ U.

Recursion!

Recursion is computation.

So while The Universe may or may not be computation, your thoughts of the universe ( u ) are computation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computability_theory

[Atla]

That's cute, but that doesn't make everything a computation.

You know what this symbol means in logic, yes? ∈

x ∈ Y : x is an element of Y.

Lets represent The Universe with symbol 'U'.
Lets represent Atla's body with symbol 'A'.
Lets represent Atla's CONCEPTION of The Universe with the symbol 'u'.

Therefore this is a valid and true logical expression:

u ∈ A ∈ U

Therefore u ∈ U.

Recursion!

Recursion is computation.

So while The Universe may or may not be computation, your thoughts of the universe ( u ) are computation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computability_theory

What you wrote makes abso fucking lutely no sense. You can't simplify it to such simple symbols, simple logical expressions, you can't use U for unvierse at all in such a manner, and there is no recursion here and thoughts aren't computation either. You are very ill.

[TimeSeeker]

What you wrote makes abso fucking lutely no sense. You can't simplify it to such simple symbols, simple logical expressions, you can't use U for unvierse at all in such a manner, and there is no recursion here and thoughts aren't computation either. You are very ill.

I can't? Why not? You simplified it to a simple symbol like "The Universe"? So you are allowed to label it but I am not?!?! Hypocrite!

OK, if you insist on verbosity - I am happy to go with that.

Atla's CONCEPTION of The Universe exists in Atla's head.
Atla's head is part of The Universe.
Therefore Atla's CONCEPTION of The Universe exists in The Universe.

Furthermore Atla's CONCEPTION of The Universe is not The Universe itself so they are DIFFERENT THINGS.

So we have a conception-of-universe-in-a-universe?
So that's like.... a Russian doll?

So that's like.... recursion?

You don't strike me as a doctor to assert any illness