These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Toward Equilibrium: Slave Avenger
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gosakumori Noh
Coven of One
#61 - 2016-02-02 20:24:58 UTC
Jev North wrote:
Gosakumori Noh wrote:
On some level, I suppose that capsuleers act like monks destroying mandalas.


Those monks mostly seen to destroy their own. I wonder if they are disturbed if another monk does it for them, and why.


I have to imagine that it is considered rude to destroy another monk's mandala. That said, given that the purpose of the exercise is to disavow attachment to material beauty, a great deal of incense and chanting probably makes amends.
Veikitamo Gesakaarin
Doomheim
#62 - 2016-02-03 07:02:03 UTC
Diana Kim wrote:
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:

Hey, if you're going to apply scientific concepts out-of-context to human life why stop at thermodynamics?

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of those good for nothing neutrinos and their insistence to barely interact with anyone else at all. They're almost as bad as those bosons that keep on imparting mass or force when they're not even asked to!

Don't be stupid. Assigning a moral property to subatomic particles is a pinnacle of ignorance. They behave according to laws that Maker bestowed upon them, they can't be good or bad, kind of evil, they are just like gears in a system, doing their job. Like all of us should.


It's almost like I made a satirical statement pointing out the absurdities of correlating scientific concepts describing very particular and specific physical systems as weak analogies in a philosophical or metaphysical construct to the point they become an absurdity.

I then pointed out that your concept of thermodynamic equilibrium is a local event and not a global event as it applies to the universe as a whole. The major force that will act upon matter in the universe is gravity and as a whole while it may create local areas of negative entropy such as in the formation of stars and other gravitationally bound objects it causes a global increase in entropy within the universe because it radiates more energy than its total mass during their formation.

As such, a universe in a state of maximum entropy is one in which all matter in the universe has been converted into radiation which is completely uniform across the entire universe and gravity can no longer act to create areas of local negative entropy such as it is now. That will be a global thermodynamic equilibrium across the entire universe which is different in nature to the equilibrium of a chemistry set because there is no matter at all.

But that's talking on a timescale of hundreds of trillions of years which begs the question -- what does entropy have anything to do with the here and now of human affairs?

Kurilaivonen|Concern
Kalaratiri
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#63 - 2016-02-03 11:24:53 UTC
It's almost like you made a joke of some very minor subtlety and expected Kim to even attempt to recognise it.

Big smile

She's mad but she's magic, there's no lie in her fire.

This is possibly one of the worst threads in the history of these forums.  - CCP Falcon

I don't remember when last time you said something that wasn't either dumb or absurd. - Diana Kim
Diana Kim
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#64 - 2016-02-03 16:19:28 UTC
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:
Diana Kim wrote:
Veikitamo Gesakaarin wrote:

Hey, if you're going to apply scientific concepts out-of-context to human life why stop at thermodynamics?

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of those good for nothing neutrinos and their insistence to barely interact with anyone else at all. They're almost as bad as those bosons that keep on imparting mass or force when they're not even asked to!

Don't be stupid. Assigning a moral property to subatomic particles is a pinnacle of ignorance. They behave according to laws that Maker bestowed upon them, they can't be good or bad, kind of evil, they are just like gears in a system, doing their job. Like all of us should.


It's almost like I made a satirical statement pointing out the absurdities of correlating scientific concepts describing very particular and specific physical systems as weak analogies in a philosophical or metaphysical construct to the point they become an absurdity.

What you have said was a straightforward ignorance. You can call it however you wish, like "satire", but it won't change the fact that it is ignorance.

I am not in the mood of reading false pseudo-scientific crap. If you don't have real facts behind your back, please kindly keep radio silence and don't bother the readers. Thanks in advance.

Honored are the dead, for their legacy guides us.

In memory of Tibus Heth, Caldari State Executor YC110-115, Hero and Patriot.
Gosakumori Noh
Coven of One
#65 - 2016-02-03 20:07:13 UTC
I love you all so much, there is no need to worry, darlings!

Mummy Noh Asserts: virtual pair annihilation favors the production of (positive) matter because anti matter is produced at a rate insufficient to sustain conservation. The Universe is gaining weight. Why? Either the Hand of God has written it so, or we exist within a Universe where the ratio of virtual matter to virtual anti matter just happens to be greater than one (following in the footsteps of other Convenient Constants).

The Universe will never achieve equilibrium ever ever not even in a million trillion years.

No! No! Stop that worrying! The Universe is flat. It will not dissipate into barren emptiness, because there is no emptiness. Neither will it squish. The spreading and ejaculations are balanced. Why? BECAUSE I SAY SO!

Mummy Noh Suspects: that the Universe is already a million trillion years old and that big bangs are very fancy superstitious nonsense. Yes, they conform nicely to observation, but let's face facts, sweeties, our finite little brains don't like infinity and we want to see a moment of Creation because we are inherently fairy tale believers and we see what we want.

Little bangs, on the other hand, are fun! Who wants to have just one orgasm, anyway, I mean, really?