wow, bitcoin's astro birth chart is full on!

[Crypt_Current]

Now, anyone who's had the questionable fortune to read some of my other posts can easily see that I don't have no truck for no hoodoo nohow. I may view all the Semitic religions as an ancient curse on humanity, but I just can't get too worked up about Ouija boards and the like.

LOL, you are simply awesome!

I used to frequent another investment discussion board where one of the folks ran an astrology thread and would regularly clue us all in to secrets hidden in the stars. I don't recall anyone, at least for not very long, getting bent out of shape about it, it was just for fun.

That's my take on this discussion, have fun. I hope I'm not insulting astrology fans by patronizing them, that's not my intent.

Right on -- let's play NICELY!  Remember, all of us here on this board are pioneers of a major world-changing paradigm shift.

... Where's Technomage when we need some general pump-up speech??  Meh, maybe he adamantly hates astrology like arepo.  I dunno, I'm curious; also tired 

[1714208659]

1714208659

[arepo]

if you can state a hypothesis, we can discuss this. all you've said right now is "the rate of receipt of EM radiation (light) from the sun changes hurr durr".

yeah, it actually fluctuates wildly every day. that is what the phenomenon of day is.

what mechanism do you propose links this differential to anything that has to do with predicting future events, individuals' personalities, or anything of the like? what experiments can you run to demonstrate such a mechanism? btw, have you ever heard of Carlson's Experiment (astrologers could match individuals to signs at a rate no better than chance) or the Mars Effect (a single statistical analysis seemed to suggest that Mars' location affected athletes but such a correlation has never be independently verified).

I'm not inclined to get into this with you again.  You proved your stubborn, closed-minded attitude very clearly last time.  Now, can you leave us idiots alone to circle-jerk with our pointless calculations and comparisons?

i ask you a pointed question which you can't hand-wave your way out of so you resort to ad hom's and asking me to 'leave you alone'. nice. regardless of whether or not you think you can convince me of your position, you ought to at least think about the question for the sake of your own intellectual honesty, don't you think? seriously, all sarcasm aside.

Actually arepo, please don't -- your increasingly huffy posts are beginning to amuse me

there is nothing huffy about my posts; i merely find that if i do not ask extremely pointed questions, we never get further than ZOMG YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN HOROSCOPES YOU'RE SUCH A CLOSED-MINDED FOOL.

Also, doesn't your precious big bang theory say something like everything started from a singularity, that contained the entirety of the physical universe in one single item?  If that is the case, why WOULDN'T everything affect everything else, despite distance between objects?

it's just plain sad that you're turning this into a tribal issue. seriously, my theory? what are you, a creationist? regardless, i can pm you all sorts of information about cosmology and the ramifications of the theoretical singularity if you're actually interested. something tells me you're not. maybe it's because you could inform yourself much more easily as you clearly have an internet connection and yet you remain ignorant.

here's the deal: i promise never again to make huffy posts in your little astrology clubs if notme actually attempts an intellectually honest answer to my question (bolded above) and you actually attempt to educate yourself on the finer points of big bang cosmology. aren't you curious whether or not the empirical data does in fact support such a belief? you're right, naively, a singularity produces the suspicion that everything IS connected in some way or another. but of course it's more complicated than that. you'd have to be able to demonstrate a mechanism for the specific effects astrologers claim the orientation of planets and the like have on terrestrial events. can you do that?

[arepo]

Bitcoin is an instantiation of a new, higher dimensional form of life.

oh and this is great, too. are you prepared to defend such a claim? [hint: what definition of 'higher-dimensional' and 'life' are you using?]

i am a large purple dinosaur. i can make bold unsubstantiated claims on forums too. i don't quite see the fun though.

[Crypt_Current]

if you can state a hypothesis, we can discuss this. all you've said right now is "the rate of receipt of EM radiation (light) from the sun changes hurr durr".

yeah, it actually fluctuates wildly every day. that is what the phenomenon of day is.

what mechanism do you propose links this differential to anything that has to do with predicting future events, individuals' personalities, or anything of the like? what experiments can you run to demonstrate such a mechanism? btw, have you ever heard of Carlson's Experiment (astrologers could match individuals to signs at a rate no better than chance) or the Mars Effect (a single statistical analysis seemed to suggest that Mars' location affected athletes but such a correlation has never be independently verified).

I'm not inclined to get into this with you again.  You proved your stubborn, closed-minded attitude very clearly last time.  Now, can you leave us idiots alone to circle-jerk with our pointless calculations and comparisons?

i ask you a pointed question which you can't hand-wave your way out of so you resort to ad hom's and asking me to 'leave you alone'. nice. regardless of whether or not you think you can convince me of your position, you ought to at least think about the question for the sake of your own intellectual honesty, don't you think? seriously, all sarcasm aside.

Actually arepo, please don't -- your increasingly huffy posts are beginning to amuse me

there is nothing huffy about my posts; i merely find that if i do not ask extremely pointed questions, we never get further than ZOMG YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN HOROSCOPES YOU'RE SUCH A CLOSED-MINDED FOOL.

Also, doesn't your precious big bang theory say something like everything started from a singularity, that contained the entirety of the physical universe in one single item?  If that is the case, why WOULDN'T everything affect everything else, despite distance between objects?

it's just plain sad that you're turning this into a tribal issue. seriously, my theory? what are you, a creationist? regardless, i can pm you all sorts of information about cosmology and the ramifications of the theoretical singularity if you're actually interested. something tells me you're not. maybe it's because you could inform yourself much more easily as you clearly have an internet connection and yet you remain ignorant.

here's the deal: i promise never again to make huffy posts in your little astrology clubs if notme actually attempts an intellectually honest answer to my question (bolded above) and you actually attempt to educate yourself on the finer points of big bang cosmology. aren't you curious whether or not the empirical data does in fact support such a belief? you're right, naively, a singularity produces the suspicion that everything IS connected in some way or another. but of course it's more complicated than that. you'd have to be able to demonstrate a mechanism for the specific effects astrologers claim the orientation of planets and the like have on terrestrial events. can you do that?

I'll answer the bolded question:  Quantum entanglement.  But this is a science in its infancy and as such is a primitive representation of something that might not be possible for humans in current form to fully comprehend.
You can PM about cosmology (and especially eschatology) all you like, if you are so inclined to spend your free time doing so.
I want to suggest a book for you:  "The Physics of Immortality" by Frank Tipler.  You can use your Interwebs to google it, unless you are too ignorant to do so 

[Crypt_Current]

Bitcoin is an instantiation of a new, higher dimensional form of life.

oh and this is great, too. are you prepared to defend such a claim? [hint: what definition of 'higher-dimensional' and 'life' are you using?

My definition of "life" is intelligence that can replicate itself and increase its own intelligence.  The purpose of life is to engulf the universe.

"Higher-dimensional" simply means more than three spatial dimensions.

i am a large purple dinosaur. i can make bold unsubstantiated claims on forums too. i don't quite see the fun though.

Do you even like fun?

[arepo]

I'll answer the bolded question:  Quantum entanglement.  But this is a science in its infancy and as such is a primitive representation of something that might not be possible for humans in current form to fully comprehend.
You can PM about cosmology (and especially eschatology) all you like, if you are so inclined to spend your free time doing so.
I want to suggest a book for you:  "The Physics of Immortality" by Frank Tipler.  You can use your Interwebs to google it, unless you are too ignorant to do so 

there's a reference for you. if you had read that first you might find that this is not a science in its infancy at all; it was in its infancy in Einstein's time (in fact he has some pretty epic quotes that turned out to be dead wrong because even a genius's intuition is no match for physical truth). we have a very full understanding, mathematics included, of quantum theory including equations that make consistent and accurate predictions. we just don't understand why/how probabilistic systems underlie the seemingly deterministic macro-scale universe which we inhabit. furthermore, particles only become entangled under certain conditions and it is a demonstrably false claim that every particle is entangled with every other because then every particle's position, momentum, etc would change instantaneously whenever such a property of any other was changed. it is not wise to pretend to know more about a subject than one actually does, and it is certainly a terrible way to go about engaging in a discussion.

moreover, i am not inclined to do so because as with quantum mechanics, it is a subject which you could easily inform yourself about if you had the willingness. again, it seems that you do not so it is rather unfortunate that you believe that you know truths about the universe. it's a bit like claiming to know (read: for certain) what's inside a room without ever actually venturing thereinto.

[Crypt_Current]

I'll answer the bolded question:  Quantum entanglement.  But this is a science in its infancy and as such is a primitive representation of something that might not be possible for humans in current form to fully comprehend.
You can PM about cosmology (and especially eschatology) all you like, if you are so inclined to spend your free time doing so.
I want to suggest a book for you:  "The Physics of Immortality" by Frank Tipler.  You can use your Interwebs to google it, unless you are too ignorant to do so 

there's a reference for you. if you had read that first you might find that this is not a science in its infancy at all; it was in its infancy in Einstein's time (in fact he has some pretty epic quotes that turned out to be dead wrong because even a genius's intuition is no match for physical truth). we have a very full understanding, mathematics included, of quantum theory including equations that make consistent and accurate predictions. we just don't understand why/how probabilistic systems underlie the seemingly deterministic macro-scale universe which we inhabit. furthermore, particles only become entangled under certain conditions and it is a demonstrably false claim that every particle is entangled with every other because then every particle's position, momentum, etc would change instantaneously whenever such a property of any other was changed. it is not wise to pretend to know more about a subject than one actually does, and it is certainly a terrible way to go about engaging in a discussion.

moreover, i am not inclined to do so because as with quantum mechanics, it is a subject which you could easily inform yourself about if you had the willingness. again, it seems that you do not so it is rather unfortunate that you believe that you know truths about the universe. it's a bit like claiming to know (read: for certain) what's inside a room without ever actually venturing thereinto.

Dude, chill the fuck out.  No one is claiming to know anything in this thread except for you.  I hope you are a PhD and make lots of money; you seem very smart.  There, there's an ego-stroke for you, is that what you're looking for??
I take all the time I can to educate myself, i'm fucking sorry I have a low-class life with bills and worries and work and bullshit that takes time away from the time available for me to research.  I sincerely apologize to you, oh great knowledge-master arepo.

Thank you SO MUCH for all your awesome knowledge.  I'll read up on it as time permits.

I want you to KNOW, however, that according to my weekly horoscope, Friday is my lucky day.  What's your sun sign?

[arepo]

Bitcoin is an instantiation of a new, higher dimensional form of life.

oh and this is great, too. are you prepared to defend such a claim? [hint: what definition of 'higher-dimensional' and 'life' are you using?

My definition of "life" is intelligence that can replicate itself and increase its own intelligence.  The purpose of life is to engulf the universe.

"Higher-dimensional" simply means more than three spatial dimensions.

while this is a rather silly definition for life because it excludes most life on earth (basically everything that isn't part of chordata), and begs the question: what is intelligence? i'm going to humor you. this granted, i'm rather curious what makes you think that Bitcoin itself is intelligent, or capable of self-replication... are we talking about the protocol here? individual bitcoins? the original statement was so ill-formed i think you'll find you're going to have a lot of trouble defending it and i would advise you to concede now.

i'm not even going to ask why you think Bitcoin exists in any more dimensions than we do

[arepo]

Dude, chill the fuck out.  No one is claiming to know anything in this thread except for you.  I hope you are a PhD and make lots of money; you seem very smart.  There, there's an ego-stroke for you, is that what you're looking for??
I take all the time I can to educate myself, i'm fucking sorry I have a low-class life with bills and worries and work and bullshit that takes time away from the time available for me to research.  I sincerely apologize to you, oh great knowledge-master arepo.

Thank you SO MUCH for all your awesome knowledge.  I'll read up on it as time permits.

I want you to KNOW, however, that according to my weekly horoscope, Friday is my lucky day.  What's your sun sign?

hahahahahahahahahahaha

okay to answer your question before, i'm having fun now

seems i've gotten under your skin

im quite chill indeed, and curious to know where i've claimed to know anything at all in this thread. also, i am in fact on a track for a PhD in physics and hopefully it will lend me a successful career, thanks.

im sorry you don't have the time to educate yourself fully; i was merely noting that since you haven't done so, you might not want to make the kinds of claims that you do. i am going to have to concede here, though, and agree that it is in fact quite amusing to read huffy posts, you were right after all.

[Crypt_Current]

Bitcoin is an instantiation of a new, higher dimensional form of life.

oh and this is great, too. are you prepared to defend such a claim? [hint: what definition of 'higher-dimensional' and 'life' are you using?

My definition of "life" is intelligence that can replicate itself and increase its own intelligence.  The purpose of life is to engulf the universe.

"Higher-dimensional" simply means more than three spatial dimensions.

while this is a rather silly definition for life because it excludes most life on earth (basically everything that isn't part of chordata), and begs the question: what is intelligence? i'm going to humor you. this granted, i'm rather curious what makes you think that Bitcoin itself is intelligent, or capable of self-replication... are we talking about the protocol here? individual bitcoins? the original statement was so ill-formed i think you'll find you're going to have a lot of trouble defending it and i would advise you to concede now.

i'm not even going to ask why you think Bitcoin exists in any more dimensions than we do

What is your definition of silly?  What is your definition of humor?  What is your definition of protocol?  What is your definition of curious?

Man, you are just ridiculous.  I'll wager your social life is abysmal.  Conversing with you has become not fun.  Maybe it will be more fun in the future, i dunno, but right now you are like the dorkiest dude at the party.

[Crypt_Current]

im sorry you don't have the time to educate yourself fully; i was merely noting that since you haven't done so, you might not want to make the kinds of claims that you do. i am going to have to concede here, though, and agree that it is in fact quite amusing to read huffy posts, you were right after all.

This is a SPECULATION forum.  Outlandish claims are to be found herein.  I guess you didn't get that memo or something.
Thank you for conceding.

[arepo]

Maybe it will be more fun in the future, i dunno, but right now you are like the dorkiest dude at the party.

and you're like the jock who ends up cheating off said kid's test right after making fun of him behind his back. you can think my social life is 'abysmal' to make you feel better about the ridiculous things your posts contain (a curious choice of insult which makes me think you're actually still in high school) but i know i spend a lot less time obsessing about bitcoin's astrological significance than you which makes me feel pretty good about myself, actually. are you done with the ad hominems?

edit: sorry, i just wanted to add that if you actually engaged in healthy discussion like having a fair conversation about why you excluded invertebrates from your definition of life or if you were referring to the protocol or individual bitcoins, it might be more fun for the both of us. that being said, a note should also be made that while outlandish claims are often found here, completely unsubstantiated claims aren't really conducive to healthy discussion. it's strange that you seem to refuse to be held accountable for the content of your posts. it's a double-standard at the very least.

[Crypt_Current]

Maybe it will be more fun in the future, i dunno, but right now you are like the dorkiest dude at the party.

and you're like the jock who ends up cheating off said kid's test right after making fun of him behind his back. you can think my social life is 'abysmal' to make you feel better about the ridiculous things your posts contain (a curious choice of insult which makes me think you're actually still in high school) but i know i spend a lot less time obsessing about bitcoin's astrological significance than you which makes me feel pretty good about myself, actually. are you done with the ad hominems?

Yes :-)

But I want to add:  This thread was started for amusement / speculation purposes.  Astrology is a deterministic process with a set of rules. What was done by posting this thread was to elucidate Bitcoin's birth chart according to the rules of astrology, for amusement and speculation purposes.  That's the extent of it.
But you asked us to go further than that intended extent.  That was unkind and unfair.  You asked us to explain how astrology can be scientifically valid.  Fuck if we know.  Fuck if we even CARE.  it's fucking fun.  That's all.  You have made this not fun.  Congratulations.  I won't ignore you though, because I like to expose myself to intelligent people and you seem intelligent, but perhaps unduly arrogant.

This thread is for amusement purposes, not for discussing the validity of astrology.  Maybe you can know someday whether astrology is valid or not, but that is an entirely different discussion that belongs in another thread, IMO.

[notme]

if you can state a hypothesis, we can discuss this. all you've said right now is "the rate of receipt of EM radiation (light) from the sun changes hurr durr".

yeah, it actually fluctuates wildly every day. that is what the phenomenon of day is.

what mechanism do you propose links this differential to anything that has to do with predicting future events, individuals' personalities, or anything of the like? what experiments can you run to demonstrate such a mechanism? btw, have you ever heard of Carlson's Experiment (astrologers could match individuals to signs at a rate no better than chance) or the Mars Effect (a single statistical analysis seemed to suggest that Mars' location affected athletes but such a correlation has never be independently verified).

I'm not inclined to get into this with you again.  You proved your stubborn, closed-minded attitude very clearly last time.  Now, can you leave us idiots alone to circle-jerk with our pointless calculations and comparisons?

i ask you a pointed question which you can't hand-wave your way out of so you resort to ad hom's and asking me to 'leave you alone'. nice. regardless of whether or not you think you can convince me of your position, you ought to at least think about the question for the sake of your own intellectual honesty, don't you think? seriously, all sarcasm aside.

Actually arepo, please don't -- your increasingly huffy posts are beginning to amuse me

there is nothing huffy about my posts; i merely find that if i do not ask extremely pointed questions, we never get further than ZOMG YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN HOROSCOPES YOU'RE SUCH A CLOSED-MINDED FOOL.

Also, doesn't your precious big bang theory say something like everything started from a singularity, that contained the entirety of the physical universe in one single item?  If that is the case, why WOULDN'T everything affect everything else, despite distance between objects?

it's just plain sad that you're turning this into a tribal issue. seriously, my theory? what are you, a creationist? regardless, i can pm you all sorts of information about cosmology and the ramifications of the theoretical singularity if you're actually interested. something tells me you're not. maybe it's because you could inform yourself much more easily as you clearly have an internet connection and yet you remain ignorant.

here's the deal: i promise never again to make huffy posts in your little astrology clubs if notme actually attempts an intellectually honest answer to my question (bolded above) and you actually attempt to educate yourself on the finer points of big bang cosmology. aren't you curious whether or not the empirical data does in fact support such a belief? you're right, naively, a singularity produces the suspicion that everything IS connected in some way or another. but of course it's more complicated than that. you'd have to be able to demonstrate a mechanism for the specific effects astrologers claim the orientation of planets and the like have on terrestrial events. can you do that?

Execpt I've considered that question far more than you I'm sure.  Also, we've done this dance before and I know you won't even consider my arguments.  Go read that other thread if you really want to rehash. My point is not to move beyond your question, but to ignore it since it has nothing to do with the topic.  It's exactly like everyone who comes into a TA thread and tries to derail the discussion by saying TA is bogus.  I don't give a shit about convincing you, but I would like to have a discussion with those who do believe.  So yeah, fuck off.

[RodeoX]

The problem is that never once in all of history has a horoscope predicted anything. To me this a good reason to assume that they never will.

[matthewh3]

The bus that drives past you on the road has a greater gravitational affect on you then any planet and definitely any star apart from the Earth plus moon so why wasn't the nearest bus included in that chart?

[herzmeister]

the bus *is* included in the charts of course. that's because they predicted the bus as well. learn to read the stars.  

[beardman]

Now, anyone who's had the questionable fortune to read some of my other posts can easily see that I don't have no truck for no hoodoo nohow. I may view all the Semitic religions as an ancient curse on humanity, but I just can't get too worked up about Ouija boards and the like.

I used to frequent another investment discussion board where one of the folks ran an astrology thread and would regularly clue us all in to secrets hidden in the stars. I don't recall anyone, at least for not very long, getting bent out of shape about it, it was just for fun.

That's my take on this discussion, have fun. I hope I'm not insulting astrology fans by patronizing them, that's not my intent.

Exactly, once they start telling us to track down and kill the manipulators or non-believers in astrology, then lets get upset, mean, and critical. I think its silly to believe things without empirical evidence that they work (not trying to get into an argument about what evidence there may be for astrology), but its still fun to check out, and maybe it will even give you some insight/useful advice (like be careful about your overleveraged position on Bitcoinica because mars is over there).

[Kettenmonster]

The bus that drives past you on the road has a greater gravitational affect on you then any planet apart from Earth so why wasn't the nearest bus included in that chart?

It´s just that buses are unreliable, they come late and you don´t know beforehand who is in.
Guess what astrology was invented a very few thousand before buses emerged on this planet.
Sometimes it´s really easy to explain why a certain factor is not in the equation, even if you don´ t know the equation itself. 

The problem is that never once in all of history has a horoscope predicted anything. To me this a good reason to assume that they never will.

As much agony aunt google taught me, horoscope are not meant to predicted anything. So yes you are absolutely correct in your assumption.
Could be I got it wrong, but aren´t it meant to help to judge strengths and weaknesses.

Is there an advisable website for horoscopes? Who is the expert to dare a recommendation?
I´d like to give it a trial on my personal experience.

[matthewh3]

the bus *is* included in the charts of course. that's because they predicted the bus as well. learn to read the stars.  

Oh so I'm not a lunatic for thinking the mass of the number 67 bus to Shudehill has a greater gravitational effect on me then V4641 Sagittarii.

Edit:  No pun intended on the use of the word lunatic