Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
An emergent property is one which arises from the interaction of "lower-level" entities, none of which show it.
As Harrison Ford's face emerges from pits on the dvd, yes?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Athiesm and disproving God
- Thread starter xkatz
- Start date
An emergent property is one which arises from the interaction of "lower-level" entities, none of which show it.
As Harrison Ford's face emerges from pits on the dvd, yes?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
The Scandinavian term 'winter street' for the milkyway is an example of vocab from the relative position of the stars unique to that location yes.
You seem to be struggling with the concept. Here's an example: think of symmetry.
I have 10 pennies in a jumble on the table. Are they symmetric? No. Do they have symmetry hidden in them somewhere? No. They're arranged asymmetrically.
Now... I rearrange the pennies to form a square. Are they symmetric? Yes. Where dud the symmetry come from? Nowhere - it's emergent.
Let me get this straight: because Norwegians use the Norwegian language to describe things, the universe knows Norwegian?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
An emergent property of a system is one that is not a property of any component of that system, but is still a feature of the system as a whole.
the pennies arranging themselves symmetrically would be an emergent property, you doing it is a creative process-
which is where I think our universes remarkable symmetry came from
the pennies arranging themselves symmetrically would be an emergent property, you doing it is a creative process-
which is where I think our universes remarkable symmetry came from
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
you seem to be struggling with the concept, does the DVD know Star Wars?
In this case, by "knows", what I'm getting at is that you claim the universe has Norwegian stored within it (i.e. other than in the heads of Norwegian-speakers) and is capable of transmitting Norwegian so that the Norwegian language could be learned. Why do you think this?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
same analogy- the DVD doesn't literally 'know' or 'contain' the actors face in any recognizable form, but his face is nevertheless made 'inevitable' as Revolting puts it, by it's exact composition- which in itself appears hopelessly chaotic and unpredictable.
I think the outcome of Norwegian was 'intended' in the sense that everything was planned, designed yes, otherwise you have the problem of the accounting for random pits on a disc resulting in a meaningful movie purely by accident. It's a long shot to say the least
I think the outcome of Norwegian was 'intended' in the sense that everything was planned, designed yes, otherwise you have the problem of the accounting for random pits on a disc resulting in a meaningful movie purely by accident. It's a long shot to say the least
Except this isn't true at all.
The pits are too small to see with the naked eye, but there's nothing chaotic or unpredictable about them at all. If you really wanted to, you could sit down with a microscope and a codebook and transcribe the movie pixel by pixel and frame by frame.
Is it more or less of a long shot than a god magically poofing itself into existence?
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
I don't formulate my own gods, I wait until someone else has a description of what they believe in and then I evaluate that description to see if it matches up to the reality that we observe. If it does, I would believe it, if it does not, I do not. I reject the claims made by others regarding gods, I do not make claims myself. So far, no gods have met the test. That's why I'm an atheist.
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
You seem to have the odd assumption that everything we see around us was pre-ordained from the beginning but nothing could be further from the truth. What we see today is the result of a long process that had no clue of it's outcome. Humans are here because of billions of years of biological evolution. Had that evolution been different, we would not have existed at all. The same with Norwegian, had linguistic evolution gone differently, it would never have existed as a language, something else might have.
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
I'd dispute that, the pixels are not individually and directly represented, they are represented by less bits than the emergent result- through complex compression algorithms- then even the compression can be compressed by another algorithm, and so can the algorithms... until you have a relatively tiny seed of data, self extracting into a very large complex one. were it complex enough for the result to develop it's own consciousness- it would have an extremely hard time cracking the layers of seemingly chaotic data that gave rise to it, and might consider it's reality as entirely inevitable and without any need for magic.
you tell me, is the movie accidentally creating itself more or less of a long shot than Hollywood magic poofing it into existence?[/quote][/QUOTE]
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
I come to the same conclusion as the vast majority of humanity, including many of our greatest scientists, so I'm not sure in what way it is particularly odd?
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
Ah, argumentum ad populum strikes again.
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
doesn't make it correct, just not 'odd' !
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
Alright, you have a wrong assumption. Better?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
Not according to most people! 
In this case chance entails the pre-existence of the materials composing the movie that assemble themselves to make a Hollywood film via some well specified process. For instance, by throwing them in the air to see what happens.
But what about the Universe? Are you aware of random mechanisms that apply to Universes? What are the probability distributions that give rise to whole Universes?
For chance/probability to make sense you need to provide the statistical distribution of all possible Universes by giving the set of possible results and the procedure used to generate one of the possible outcomes.
So, what is it?
I ask, because if this information is not available, then any consideration concerning chance is meaningless.
Ciao
- viole
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
astronomically improbable
Improbable makes sense when you have the statistical distribution.
Which is....
incidentally, astronomical makes also sense only when you have astronomy already in place. Doesn't it? But we have no astronomy without Universes. So, what does that mean?
Ciao
- viole
Last edited: