[MD] reality

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Adrie, by stating "once it is there" you are implying the creation of
information.  It may be impossible to destroy information, but much
information is forgotten.  Note the gods of old, they were all information.
 There is much information which we also dismiss as meaningless.  By
recognizing, you mean we create the information for it.  There is no
information that we are uncovering, as you state in you above sentence, it
becomes.  There is also the argument of accidents.  Such a thing is also
information.  So the use of NEVER you present above is not rational.

If you can present a form of information that is not part of human
creativity, I would like to hear it.



A droplet of water contains more information than a non-droplet of water
A collection of sandgrains on the beach contains more information than a
non-collection of sandgrains on the beach.

Regardless of the observer/observed,-it is possible to leave the
observermodel
out of the picture, if you work this out on a sheet of paper, because you
keep the relative position as observer, not the absolute(the absolute
requires to observe
physikally), the relative position not.

Now you can avoid this difficulty, you, Mark , defined yourself as the only
observer in the above stated, but you forgot all other observers, and you
did not define your properties to observe, your variable's, your tools.

We are on very thin ice now, ..we are trespassing on a physikal world with
metaphysikal branches.

starting from the relative model, the sheet of paper, ask yourself this,
without
observing it,..

will the informationcontainer(the number of sandgrains ) ever be the same
again
after only 1 grain of sand is moved in the model,keep in mind that this
moving
will change the total configuration,the position of all other grains,
without moving them. the configuration can never be the same again.
Even if you succeed to re-place the graind,..it became older,containing more
information.

Also keep in mind that nothing is observed.
There was no observer defined/present

Can you tell me the endconclusion? its not an equasion or something.
It should be clear.

Adrie
2010/11/26 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>

> Hi Adrie,
> I took the liberty of emphasizing your statement below.
> Mark
>
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 6:39 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> >
> > [Adrie]
> > Btw , its not about inventing , Ian,its about recognising something, ONCE
> > IT IS THERE
> > it will never leave again, it is impossible to destroy information.
> >
> > Oops is never an argument.
> > greetz, Adrie
> >
> > [Mark]
> >
> Adrie, by stating "once it is there" you are implying the creation of
> information.  It may be impossible to destroy information, but much
> information is forgotten.  Note the gods of old, they were all information.
>  There is much information which we also dismiss as meaningless.  By
> recognizing, you mean we create the information for it.  There is no
> information that we are uncovering, as you state in you above sentence, it
> becomes.  There is also the argument of accidents.  Such a thing is also
> information.  So the use of NEVER you present above is not rational.
>
> If you can present a form of information that is not part of human
> creativity, I would like to hear it.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
>
> > parser
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser