Born to do Math 151 - No Hidden Linkages
Scott Douglas Jacobsen & Rick Rosner
January 1, 2020
[Beginning of recorded material]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What about hidden linkages here or the clarity of the information?
Rosner: Einstein famously hated the idea and said, "God does not play dice with the universe." That's a paraphrase. He said it in German. It bugged people that things should not be determinate. You can't predict what is going to happen, even if you know everything about the universe or some part of the universe.
People looked around to see if there was a way around it. It was proven, "No, there is not a way around it based on Bell's Theorem or Bell's Inequality." It means that you cannot have hidden linkages in the universe that provide the information.
However, you have black and black-ish holes, which are shielded informationally from the rest of the universe. Those things, I suspect, can be linked in a non-straightforward way. Because they are not part, to some extent, of the overall information or the accessible information that is being processed in the universe.
They generate information and suck up information. But what's is going on in them is shielded, which means that there can be more complicated linkages. That's a possibility. Maybe, you can do business in the universe without.
If you are looking at the universe as an information processor similar to our brains as information processors, certainly, there's a lot of information being processed not available to conscious consideration. There's a lot of information that comes to us pre-processed, like visual information.
We can become savvier about the processes that go into making a polished vision of the world. If you take LSD, which I don't recommend, you can see a breakdown in those processes. When you get information that has been shittily processed or incompletely processed, you lose the smooth presentation of the world that we are used to.
Normally, you don't see 99% of the processes that go into presenting the visual picture of the world. You don't see the processes. For the most part, those that go into choosing the words you're going to say from moment-to-moment.
You can pick words for a piece of writing. But all of the words in my head, I have ideas; the words to express those ideas are largely auto-filled almost. The feeling is the feeling of auto-fill. Here's what I want to say, here are the words, these are the presentations of the ideas in the auto-filled words.
It makes sense to assume that there would be processing in the universe if the universe is an information processing entity like our own brains. It would make sense that there would be processing going on behind our brains.
It would make sense that there would be processing behind the scenes and the processing would be fed into the universe via the places in the universe that are conduits for information that isn't open to the conscious arena or until it enters the conscious arena.
The places to do that are the massive black holes at the center of each galaxy and, maybe, some of the black and near-black objects throughout galaxies, like neutron stars, collapsed stars that have turned into black holes.
Although, I would suspect. If you were looking for a good place to process information, a billion sun mass black hole at the center of a galaxy is a better place, a better suspect, for an information processing factory than a neutron star, which, though it is collapsed, probably has much less room for hidden masses.
I would guess the objects outside the central black hole may act as associative hooks. This is what I was thinking last night at 2 in the morning. Like everything I think, it could be garbage. A star is going to go through its life cycle, or one life cycle, within the life cycle of the active universe or one cycle of 20 to 30 billion years.
A star will burn out if 15 to 20 billion years and then become a black hole or a neutron star and then becoming dormant with al the stuff in it locked in place. Maybe, this locked star or these locked stars. Say a galaxy lights up, again and again, maybe, a hook to relight up the galaxy may be these locked stars. These stars that once burned bright and now sit there almost invisible.
Maybe, these are time capsules to previous iterations of the active universe. So, maybe, a galaxy that has gone through a bunch of cycles would have a bunch of collapsed stars from different cycles. Maybe, you can light up different versions of galaxies based on which dormant parts of the galaxy get re-lit via being associated with earlier iterations of the galaxy.
Say the universe has gone through 10 cycles, a cycle is a deceptive term because we don't think the universe blows up and then shrinks down. We think parts of the universe blow up, move to the center, and shrink down, and then are replaced with other parts of the universe blowing up, so the universe isn't expanding and contracting or roughly stating the same size and processing the same amount of information - plus or minus.
It is not a full expanse or a full collapse. It is a rolling boil. If 10 cycles, which sounds like a spinning class, maybe, the combinations of galaxies that light up for each cycle are based on which combinations of galaxies are lit up in previous iterations, and are being lit up by association.
It is similar to the way a neuron can play a roll in the expression of more than one thought based on the combination of neurons that light up. Maybe, it is a combination of galaxies that light up with there being more information available via the combinations than if each galaxy represented a single thing, e.g., a 22-degree angle, "This is the galaxy that lights up if you have a line with a 22-degree angle in front of you."
Maybe, the galaxy does more than one thing given what other 10^n or 100 billion other galaxies light up. Certainly, something facilitating this are dormant galaxies hit by floods of neutrinos. If this doesn't entirely work within normal space, if that doesn't give enough control over what galaxies light up, then you can sneakily postulate more complicated connections among the structures of the universe as long as those connections are held within black-ish gravitationally collapsed structures.
[End of recorded material]Rosner: Einstein famously hated the idea and said, "God does not play dice with the universe." That's a paraphrase. He said it in German. It bugged people that things should not be determinate. You can't predict what is going to happen, even if you know everything about the universe or some part of the universe.
People looked around to see if there was a way around it. It was proven, "No, there is not a way around it based on Bell's Theorem or Bell's Inequality." It means that you cannot have hidden linkages in the universe that provide the information.
However, you have black and black-ish holes, which are shielded informationally from the rest of the universe. Those things, I suspect, can be linked in a non-straightforward way. Because they are not part, to some extent, of the overall information or the accessible information that is being processed in the universe.
They generate information and suck up information. But what's is going on in them is shielded, which means that there can be more complicated linkages. That's a possibility. Maybe, you can do business in the universe without.
If you are looking at the universe as an information processor similar to our brains as information processors, certainly, there's a lot of information being processed not available to conscious consideration. There's a lot of information that comes to us pre-processed, like visual information.
We can become savvier about the processes that go into making a polished vision of the world. If you take LSD, which I don't recommend, you can see a breakdown in those processes. When you get information that has been shittily processed or incompletely processed, you lose the smooth presentation of the world that we are used to.
Normally, you don't see 99% of the processes that go into presenting the visual picture of the world. You don't see the processes. For the most part, those that go into choosing the words you're going to say from moment-to-moment.
You can pick words for a piece of writing. But all of the words in my head, I have ideas; the words to express those ideas are largely auto-filled almost. The feeling is the feeling of auto-fill. Here's what I want to say, here are the words, these are the presentations of the ideas in the auto-filled words.
It makes sense to assume that there would be processing in the universe if the universe is an information processing entity like our own brains. It would make sense that there would be processing going on behind our brains.
It would make sense that there would be processing behind the scenes and the processing would be fed into the universe via the places in the universe that are conduits for information that isn't open to the conscious arena or until it enters the conscious arena.
The places to do that are the massive black holes at the center of each galaxy and, maybe, some of the black and near-black objects throughout galaxies, like neutron stars, collapsed stars that have turned into black holes.
Although, I would suspect. If you were looking for a good place to process information, a billion sun mass black hole at the center of a galaxy is a better place, a better suspect, for an information processing factory than a neutron star, which, though it is collapsed, probably has much less room for hidden masses.
I would guess the objects outside the central black hole may act as associative hooks. This is what I was thinking last night at 2 in the morning. Like everything I think, it could be garbage. A star is going to go through its life cycle, or one life cycle, within the life cycle of the active universe or one cycle of 20 to 30 billion years.
A star will burn out if 15 to 20 billion years and then become a black hole or a neutron star and then becoming dormant with al the stuff in it locked in place. Maybe, this locked star or these locked stars. Say a galaxy lights up, again and again, maybe, a hook to relight up the galaxy may be these locked stars. These stars that once burned bright and now sit there almost invisible.
Maybe, these are time capsules to previous iterations of the active universe. So, maybe, a galaxy that has gone through a bunch of cycles would have a bunch of collapsed stars from different cycles. Maybe, you can light up different versions of galaxies based on which dormant parts of the galaxy get re-lit via being associated with earlier iterations of the galaxy.
Say the universe has gone through 10 cycles, a cycle is a deceptive term because we don't think the universe blows up and then shrinks down. We think parts of the universe blow up, move to the center, and shrink down, and then are replaced with other parts of the universe blowing up, so the universe isn't expanding and contracting or roughly stating the same size and processing the same amount of information - plus or minus.
It is not a full expanse or a full collapse. It is a rolling boil. If 10 cycles, which sounds like a spinning class, maybe, the combinations of galaxies that light up for each cycle are based on which combinations of galaxies are lit up in previous iterations, and are being lit up by association.
It is similar to the way a neuron can play a roll in the expression of more than one thought based on the combination of neurons that light up. Maybe, it is a combination of galaxies that light up with there being more information available via the combinations than if each galaxy represented a single thing, e.g., a 22-degree angle, "This is the galaxy that lights up if you have a line with a 22-degree angle in front of you."
Maybe, the galaxy does more than one thing given what other 10^n or 100 billion other galaxies light up. Certainly, something facilitating this are dormant galaxies hit by floods of neutrinos. If this doesn't entirely work within normal space, if that doesn't give enough control over what galaxies light up, then you can sneakily postulate more complicated connections among the structures of the universe as long as those connections are held within black-ish gravitationally collapsed structures.
Authors[1]
American Television Writer
(Updated July 25, 2019)
*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.*
According to some semi-reputable sources gathered in a listing here, Rick G. Rosner may have among America's, North America's, and the world’s highest measured IQs at or above 190 (S.D. 15)/196 (S.D. 16) based on several high range test performances created by Christopher Harding, Jason Betts, Paul Cooijmans, and Ronald Hoeflin. He earned 12 years of college credit in less than a year and graduated with the equivalent of 8 majors. He has received 8 Writers Guild Awards and Emmy nominations, and was titled 2013 North American Genius of the Year by The World Genius Directory with the main "Genius" listing here.
He has written for Remote Control, Crank Yankers, The Man Show, The Emmys, The Grammys, and Jimmy Kimmel Live!. He worked as a bouncer, a nude art model, a roller-skating waiter, and a stripper. In a television commercial, Domino’s Pizza named him the "World’s Smartest Man." The commercial was taken off the air after Subway sandwiches issued a cease-and-desist. He was named "Best Bouncer" in the Denver Area, Colorado, by Westwood Magazine.
Rosner spent much of the late Disco Era as an undercover high school student. In addition, he spent 25 years as a bar bouncer and American fake ID-catcher, and 25+ years as a stripper, and nearly 30 years as a writer for more than 2,500 hours of network television. Errol Morris featured Rosner in the interview series entitled First Person, where some of this history was covered by Morris. He came in second, or lost, on Jeopardy!, sued Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? over a flawed question and lost the lawsuit. He won one game and lost one game on Are You Smarter Than a Drunk Person? (He was drunk). Finally, he spent 37+ years working on a time-invariant variation of the Big Bang Theory.
Currently, Rosner sits tweeting in a bathrobe (winter) or a towel (summer). He lives in Los Angeles, California with his wife, dog, and goldfish. He and his wife have a daughter. You can send him money or questions at LanceVersusRick@Gmail.Com, or a direct message via Twitter, or find him on LinkedIn, or see him on YouTube.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing
Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.Com
(Updated January 1, 2020)
Scott Douglas Jacobsen founded In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal and In-Sight Publishing. He authored/co-authored some e-books, free or low-cost. If you want to contact Scott: Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.com.
Endnotes
[1] Four format points for the session article:
- Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner.
- Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott.
- Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview.
- This session article has been edited for clarity and readability.
For further information on the formatting guidelines incorporated into this document, please see the following documents:
- American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf.
- Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf.
License and Copyright
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
No comments:
Post a Comment