You got it. Entropy subsumes space-time.
Entropy is a logarithmic measure of multiplicity. Multiplicity referes to the number of microstates a system could assume that would, ultimately, precipitate a given macrostate. Thus, a space (Euclidean, Hilbert, or otherwise) is presumed with "[e]ntropy" (TPTB_need_war), not "subsum[ed]" (TPTB_need_war), for, therewithout, the system would not exist to bare states (neither micro- nor macro-). Space-time refers to a 4D space. Entropy knows no such limit in dimension. It is dimensionless and occupies all dimensions simultaneously. Choose your illusion (space) frame-of-reference. |
|
|
|
You got it. Entropy subsumes space-time. The latter is just a "convincing illusion" within certain frames-of-reference within the former. Thus yes entropy is theoretically reversible as an illusion in a frame-of-reference. |
|
|
|
The point which I should first wish to understand is whether the [capital] or [money] is beloved by the [1‱] because it is [money], or [money] because it is beloved of the [1‱].
Can't you fucking read: Thus the goal is not anti-money, but rather a technological advance into the Knowledge Age wherein capital is knowledge creation which is inherently not a homomorphism to spacetime, thus can't be financed with usury.
|
|
|
|
For CoinCube: uselessname18333, The masses don't love money enough to hoard it (thus the power-law distribution of wealth), yet they need money as a unit-of-exchange (and thus as a unit-of-account and a reasonably stable store-of-value) in order to maximize the division-of-labor which is essential to maximizing production and efficiency (the inexorable march of entropy which can not be reversible per the Second Law of Thermodynamics which Einstein even said was the most fundamental law of nature). Even the Bible says employ honest weights and measures of which an anti-money would be a violation. Thus the goal is not anti-money, but rather a technological advance into the Knowledge Age wherein capital is knowledge creation which is inherently not a homomorphism to spacetime, thus can't be financed with usury. Q.E.D. End of discussion. I have work to do. You are entirely missing the point. Value is not a homomorphism to spacetime. Value is a diverse (n-dimensional) fitness landscape (entropy) where the relationship to time and space is such that they are not just dilated but not even structurally preserved. |
|
|
|
uselessname18333, The masses don't love money enough to hoard it (thus the power-law distribution of wealth), yet they need money as a unit-of-exchange (and thus as a unit-of-account and a reasonably stable store-of-value) in order to maximize the division-of-labor which is essential to maximizing production and efficiency (the inexorable march of entropy which can not be reversible per the Second Law of Thermodynamics which Einstein even said was the most fundamental law of nature). Even the Bible says employ honest weights and measures of which an anti-money would be a violation. Thus the goal is not anti-money, but rather a technological advance into the Knowledge Age wherein capital is knowledge creation which is inherently not a homomorphism to spacetime, thus can't be financed with usury. Q.E.D. End of discussion. I have work to do. You are entirely missing the point. Value is not a homomorphism to spacetime. Value is a diverse (n-dimensional) fitness landscape (entropy) where the relationship to time and space is such that they are not just dilated but not even structurally preserved. |
|
|
|
Now, here comes the question: Do you believe ALL the above happened by pure luck or coincidence? What are the odds?
Please email Armstrong. He has coded his model with a myopia that isn't detecting such statistical anomalies. Thus his myopia. My fuzzy logic engine had worked out probabilities over years of observation, but your example is much more incisive. Kudos. |
|
|
|
I have bigger fish I am trying to fry: protecting my worthwhile assets in the perilous times to come.
As I said, very relevant to this thread: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/1597/is-it-immoral-to-download-music-illegally/25125#25125... Thus the the only possible operative definition of morality is self-interest. (Edit: you might choose it is in your self-interest to consider the interests of others. That is still self-interest, even if you characterize it as sacrifice obviously you didn't do if it wasn't to your benefit overall.) ... You asked whether it is moral to violate laws. Usually it would only be in one's self-interest to consider doing so when society has become unreasonably coercive and not consent with free will, i.e. when choice of jurisdiction is effectively nullified. I would again argue the self-interest of that tradeoff has to be weighed by each individual. Smaller communities impinge less on the degrees-of-freedom of jurisdiction. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants— Thomas Jefferson They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety— Ben Franklin |
|
|
|
You are entirely missing the point. Value is not a homomorphism to spacetime. Value is a diverse (n-dimensional) fitness landscape (entropy) where the relationship to time and space is such that they are not just dilated but not even structurally preserved. Sheesh this is above your paygrade apparently? Or maybe just a math fact you haven't contemplated. |
|
|
|
All value is based on time.
Nonsense. Value is based on relative fitness. One of the generative essence of my theory of everything (see the last two articles in my blog unheresy.com and also my Understand Everything Fundamentally essay), is that fitness can not be characterized with any holistic (aggregate or macroscopic) metric. Fitness is inherently local and individualized. Someday I will write some more carefully thought out essays to unify all the detailed arguments. But not now. I am busy being a programmer again. There is not one growth rate in an economy. Efficiency of production of some things grows faster than other things. Thus it is impossible to design a basket weighting for GDP or purchasing power which has the same relative impact on every member of society, since distinct demographics, personalities, and situations impact personal consumption priorities. Who is to decide whose priorities are paramount? The only scenario that is not redistributive is one where the currency is debased at a rate equal to the aggregate economic growth in the economy. This is the point of equilibrium where idle savings maintain purchasing power but do not grow or decline.
There is no measurable equilibrium point because the economy has diversified personal metrics. Rather the only metric I have been able to identify is the one I stated in my prior post: 3. Due to that squared law explained in #2 and coupled with the fact that small things and investments grow faster, the upcoming wealthy gain more from debasement than the egregiously wealthy. Thus debasement is a very natural, efficient allocator of wealth to the maximum production. The super wealthy can't focus their investments to the most productive because their wealth is too large to allocate efficiently. They are more concerned about safety, economies-of-scale, and return of capital, which retards production in the economy. [implication is that the more wealthy someone is, then the more reliant on usury for return-on-investment instead of non-guaranteed return (a.k.a. return versus risk)]
Thus raising the debasement rate redistributes capital from lower efficiency investment (and thus production) to higher efficiency investment and production. Thus benefiting everyone in society. Thus the debasement rate should be set as high as such that a super majority of society can receive an increase in their personal purchasing power (personal priorities) that exceeds the debasement rate. This will not stop members of society from competing for higher return-on-investment, because to be in that super majority you must compete. Whereas, if it were true that everyone had the same priorities and we could set the debasement to one monolithic purchasing power metric, then no one would have an incentive to compete. This is yet another example of why uniform distribution is lifeless. I mentioned this abstract concept in my two blogs, The Universe and Information is Alive!. |
|
|
|
coin.mx
I thought I remembered the name coin.mx from somewhere. Found it on this old thread. New developments: Since at least late 2013, MURGIO, LEBEDEV, and their co-conspirators have knowingly operated Coin.mx, a Bitcoin exchange service, in violation of federal anti-money laundering (“AML”) laws and regulations, including those requiring money services businesses like Coin.mx to meet registration and reporting requirements set forth by the United States Treasury Department. Good for me that I never used their service then. Interestingly they had emailed me a couple of months ago asking me if I had ever used the service. TBTP are closing all the avenues for escape from their total control over all fiat commerce. |
|
|
|
|
Armstrong is stuck in the fantasy world with you and the others.
I am telling you how it is. You can wait another 5 years to finally realize I am correct.
Don't worry I am usually 5 - 10 years ahead of everyone else.
|
|
|
|
I see one world reserve currency as bitcoin, but the metrics would be crazy.
Like 1 bitcoin repersents a nations debt of $1 million. or something along the lines of seeing a metric of value of debt with bitcoin.
You didn't understand a damn thing from the thread. You don't even know what a reserve currency means. Sheesh. And your fantasies about Bitcoin are typical of the newbie Bitcoin retard brigade. |
|
|
|
Greece will default.
No it won't! Your model of the goal and outcome is wrong. Read my my post at the following link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg11937734#msg11937734The entire EU will brought into debt crisis and only then will there be a monetary reset in a NWO slavery system. Dumb ass European people can't even see what is so obvious to me since 2010 when I predicted this outcome. Amigo TPTB! You might be right, but I see a Greek Default along one or more of the lines as in my original post. Yes, Europe could come to their "rescue" (LOL?), but that would indeed lead to a European outcome probably along the lines of what you propose. Which is probably close to the end-game anyway. My hunch is that Greece screws (or tries to) Europe/Germany first. The big question would be: WWFD? * * What would FRANCE do?You are wrong. The entire charade (including Russia and China) is being controlled by the banksters. It is a scripted circus. There is no sovereignty. They own you. |
|
|
|
Greece will default.
No it won't! Your model of the goal and outcome is wrong. Read my my post at the following link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg11937734#msg11937734The entire EU will brought into debt crisis and only then will there be a monetary reset in a NWO slavery system. Dumb ass European people can't even see what is so obvious to me since 2010 when I predicted this outcome. |
|
|
|
Greece will default.
No it won't! Your model of the goal and outcome is wrong. Read my my post at the following link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg11937734#msg11937734The entire EU will brought into debt crisis and only then will there be a monetary reset in a NWO slavery system. Dumb ass European people can't even see what is so obvious to me since 2010 when I predicted this outcome. |
|
|
|
Greece will default.
No it won't! Your model of the goal and outcome is wrong. Read my my post at the following link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg11937734#msg11937734The entire EU will brought into debt crisis and only then will there be a monetary reset in a NWO slavery system. Dumb ass European people can't even see what is so obvious to me since 2010 when I predicted this outcome. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
