Post
Topic
Board Economics
Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion
by
macsga
on 08/08/2015, 10:02:13 UTC
Of course life may just be an illusion of some local friction. On the whole, the entropy of the Universe might be constant but we'd have to be outside the Universe (be able to navigate spacetime at a rate greater than the speed-of-light) to falsify it thus the catch-22 (due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle). But for us to have our lives as we perceive them, then we must have relativity (due to friction).

So fight as you want against the free market which marching towards greater entropy, greater maximum division-of-labor, and greater decentralization, but nature always wins on a sufficient spacetime scale. Coasian local orders persist until they don't, e.g. the Google effect you cited.

The entropy of the Universe is (funnily) increasing; at least from our point of view of the Universe (remember, we're constantly accelerating!). To make it clear, we're heading to a Universe with maximum entropy and minimum chaos. The in between fluctuations of chaotic events are just the ripples of the waves on a "quiet" river that bumps over the rocks within. In essence, if we had a way to live forever (meaning we'd be able to observe the "end" of our Universe) everything would have been in an awkward "taxis" to introduce a Greek word to describe it.

The most philosophical question of all times though, would have been, if we're on a loop. We actually maybe are, but as a scientist, I can only accept whatever I can measure; so it's a possibility but not certainty. On the other hand, in QM there's no certainty at all; meaning that we can never be sure if we are able to observe ALL the possible "reality" but only a fraction of it (the one we actually observe). Here's a nice experiment that proves it:

http://www.gizmag.com/quantum-theory-reality-anu/37866/

The Anthropocentric model, could very well explain the abnormalities that are described above, but it's nothing but a philosophical theory and not a scientific approach. More here:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22630190-500-the-human-universe-does-consciousness-create-reality/

Last but not least, we need to be multi-scientists to construct a TOE that describes everything, which (again) even if it's formed, it can never be complete as the Goedel Theorem of incompleteness suggests...

And these are the words of John von Neumann (1963):

... there have been within the experience of people now living at least three serious crises... There have been two such crises in physics---namely, the conceptual soul-searching connected with the discovery of relativity and the conceptual difficulties connected with discoveries in quantum theory... The third crisis was in mathematics. It was a very serious conceptual crisis, dealing with rigor and the proper way to carry out a correct mathematical proof. In view of the earlier notions of the absolute rigor of mathematics, it is surprising that such a thing could have happened, and even more surprising that it could have happened in these latter days when miracles are not supposed to take place. Yet it did happen.