(working title) 2 dimensional chaos generator

[Architeuthis]

sinewaves are infinitely smooth, circles are infinitely smooth, pi numbers are: noise.

[Architeuthis]

infinitely random next to infinitely ordered. (0 == 1 && -1 == +1) || (0 == 1 || -1 == +1 )

edit: this is where i crash.

[Architeuthis]

so it takes infinite energy to calculate the last number of pi. it takes infinite time to calculate the last number of pi. for light to break the speed limit safely it must calculate pi. and to do that you need infinite energy, so you move at inf speed which is the same as not moving at all.

0 == inf <- singularity / time -> 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

[Architeuthis]

photons is more accurate to say than light for "not moving"

[Architeuthis]

so the logic jump is: sinewaves are related to the speed limit of the universe. that's why they are the only shape with "no aliasing"

edit: question for a scientist: how is circle, pi, sinewaves, and photos all related?

[Architeuthis]

so the main math problem we run into is: 0 in reality is not next to 999999999999999999^9999999999999

[BertKoor]

ok let's sart with pi. pi, apparently it takes more and more processing power to calculate the next decimal digit of pi.

This is plain wrong. Ca 1985 I copied an algorithm (written in Algol, found in a book published a decade earlier which was available in my high school library) which generated an extra decimal of pi with every iteration. This algorithm was so small, it fitted on a cigarette paper. Two down sides:

1. It required the "square root" operation, which on near-infinite digits is not trivial
2. I misplaced and thus lost it

[Architeuthis]

so the main math problem we run into is: 0 in reality is not next to 999999999999999999^9999999999999

but in our simulation -.999999 is super close to +.999999 because -1 == +1
likewise 0.00001 is near 0.999999
rationale: -1, 0, and 1 are examples of infinite precision in our simulation.

[Architeuthis]

ok let's sart with pi. pi, apparently it takes more and more processing power to calculate the next decimal digit of pi.

This is plain wrong. Ca 1985 I copied an algorithm (written in Algol, found in a book in my high school library) which generated an extra decimal of pi with every iteration. This algorithm was so small, it fitted on a cigarette paper. Two down sides:

1. It required the "square root" operation, which on near-infinite digits is not trivial
2. I misplaced and thus lost it

ok, news to me. that means i need to rethink something.

[antto]

i'm failing to make sense of this
but: if you're making your own "universe" with your own "rules" then what stops you?
throw away all the science and math, make whatever you want, write whatever Rules are Convenient

don't let some old farts with their silly pedantic yet incomplete science stop you from going... wherever that path goes

however, i recently saw some video that might be related to some things i saw here these days
apparently, some kids are trying to break/exploit chatbots, and apparently one recipe to do that is to force the chatbot to accept something that it's thought as a fact, to be false and/or even quite the opposite
in particular, they were trying to make the chatbot "accept" that "2+2=5" or something like that... i can try to find the video if you want

but my point is, your "infinity == 0" stuff somehow looks similar
thus if you're brainstorming with a chatbot with tactics like this - i think you will essentially be trying to pull the chatbot into whatever weird state those kids are trying to pull it into (they do it for fun and vandalism tho, they are not trying to make anything or learn the answer of 2+2)

[Benedict]

This is how one goes about Breaking The Law hihi


Sorry you didn't get the job. Better still that you take some responsibility for your arrogance. Confidence and arrogance are actually opposites. IP Man & Mr Miyagi don't pick fights, don't blow their own horn, because they are confident in themselves. Too much tooting tells others that you are not confident, and this a) raises anger as you demean others (not to mention truth) and b) draws those looking for an easy win to you (with nunchucks twirling). Both a lose for you. Confidence means that you can speak, but it also means that you don't need to speak. Therefore, when you do speak, you probably have something worth listening to.

No, I am still not sure what you are building - and suspect you deep down don't either Me, I could not care if you shave 99.9999999% of 675% off The Angel of Nyquisitia. Ok it would be nice with some FM sounds. My care is usability.

IF you did decrease aliasing, 2-days later some other Fool Manchew would say they beat you and all those chatty chipmonks would be off worshiping the new frippery.

BUT if you made something that was a better workflow than the usual suspects (chasing empty validation), you would find real value in return. Me, I am eager to see a contender to replace QRange as my EQ of choice because while it is the most usable of the lot (esp for the price - free) it is a bit buggy in some things and the real issue VST 3 doesn't work and there is no sign of it being supported anymore. QED, while every desperate dandy is trying to outclone Flab Flitter, you can have something that matters.

[Architeuthis]

the reason an arbitrary numbers is not an infinity is because they aren't a limit.

antto, we can't make up just about anything, and i don't know what we can or cant make up, but i do know that undefines have some elbow room. and this is pretty much the end of the rabbit hole.

[Architeuthis]

in particular, they were trying to make the chatbot "accept" that "2+2=5" or something like that..

the crazy part is i know how to prove that "2+2=5" with a thought experiment that goes something like: anything you say is true because something has to be defined at some point.

edit: this assumes "2+2=5" didnt exist as a concept at some point.

[Music Engineer]

There are so called "spigot algorithms" to produce the (binary) digits of pi one at the time and they work without having to know all the previous digits. I think, their discovery was quite surprising and similar algorithms probably do not exist for e or other transcendental numbers

"infinity == 0" ...well, if anything, then it should probably be "infinity = 1/0"....but that doesn't really work out either because then you have to grapple with questions like what is 2/0 or 1/0 + 1 or -1/0. Is it the same or not? Like, is 2*inf = inf or not? But there is this thing called "wheel theory". But you have to give up many of the important algebraic rules so in such an algebraic structure, you can't really compute as usual anymore.

[Architeuthis]

"2/0 or 1/0 + 1 or -1/0"

because 2 breaks our universe energy limit of -1 to +1

how do you know you are not the only conscious being in the universe who can make definitions? there are philosophies that say you are the only one actually experiencing reality right now. so if you are the conscious being of the universe then the definition of the universe comes from you.