# Thread: Thought experiment, don't know where else to put this.

1. Originally Posted by mmm4444bot
Okay, I've re-read the thread (twice), and revisited your links. I need some clarifications and some concrete examples from your first post, before I can continue my attempts at relating the information in all of the posts.
In a way I have given up on the weight of my idea in the way I was originally thinking about it. At this point all I am really trying to do is see if I have just discovered an interesting pattern or not.

There's an outer circle, and there's an inner circle. The center of each circle is the same point. Right?
Correct.

You later told me that the phrase "all possible outcomes" means "all possible outcomes of any given situation". The phrase "any given situation" ('situation' is a singular noun) refers to one and only one situation. I want to confirm that you are not actually thinking "all possible outcomes of all situations" (plural).
That is correct. I was thinking that you could take this model and apply it to any situation, but that it is not in it's totality measuring all possible outcomes of every situation at the same time.

Please provide more detail about your parenthetical notation of infinity above. Is it meant only to say that, given a single situation, there are infinite possible outcomes?
Yes and no. Obviously there are potentially infinity possibilities or outcomes that could occur from a specific situation. But, as I have touched on before on this forum (in the first thread I made here) certain possibilities can more or less be lumped together. And as I said, the two rules that I am using to combine the infinity possibilities or outcomes is based on occam's razor, and symmetry (and probably a rule or two that I don't know how to define).

When you say that the outer circle represents "all possible outcomes (infinity)", you are talking about the region in between the inner circle and the outer circle. Right? The inner circle is a part of the outer circle, but it seems like you're saying that there's a difference between "all possible outcomes of any given situation" and the "mean of all possibilities". Could it be that you are conflating the words 'outcomes' and 'possibilities'?
Yes, I am combining possible outcomes and all possibilities as the same thing.

Please provide at least one concrete example of this. You already stated that you're talking about all possibilities (reality). I need more detail about what you're thinking when you infer that more possibilities can be added to a set that already contains all possibilities.
OK, so an example that I am thinking of is kinda the way time moves. If you look at a clock, the numbers never go backwards, only forwards. It's pretty much the same thing as that.

Here's one example of why I need the clarifications above. It seems that "all possibilities" has already been used to define the area of the inner circle. Now you're saying that each section of the region between the circles is a different possibility. Are you thinking that each region is a possible outcome of the single given situation?
No, all possibilities is not defined as the inner circle, but the outer circle. The inner circle is the result of (or the average) of all the possibilities that could occur. Yes, each section is a different outcome or possibility that could occur of a given situation.

I'll wait for your reply, before continuing on to the other issues I've encountered.
Hopefully I haven't made things more difficult to understand.

2. I have lost interest in this thread. I don't know whether it is an exploration in metaphysics, in which case I have no idea how circles or functions in one variable could possibly be relevant, or whether it is a problem in number theory, in which case the nature of physical and social reality is irrelevant.

3. Originally Posted by JeffM
I have lost interest in this thread. I don't know whether it is an exploration in metaphysics, in which case I have no idea how circles or functions in one variable could possibly be relevant, or whether it is a problem in number theory, in which case the nature of physical and social reality is irrelevant.
Well, when I talk about what people could do, what I am really doing is inserting game theory into the equation.

But in any case..

This was just a thought experiment to begin with as a way to teach myself something. I don't doubt that most people (if not all) will lose interest in this thread and I can't blame them because this thread shows that I have been very ambiguous with the language I am using.

4. Originally Posted by Quick
In a way I have given up on the weight of my idea in the way I was originally thinking about it. At this point all I am really trying to do is see if I have just discovered an interesting pattern or not.
Okay, but are you still using the circle diagram to express the pattern, or is the circle diagram part of what you've given up?

… certain possibilities can more or less be lumped together.
I think I need a specific example of a situation, along with some lumped possibilities, to understand what you have in mind. I'm curious to learn more about what sorts of things can be treated as a group.

OK, so an example that I am thinking of is kinda the way time moves. If you look at a clock, the numbers never go backwards, only forwards. It's pretty much the same thing as that.
I'm not following how this shines any light on adding possibilities to a set that already contains every possibility.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your thoughts about adding more possibilities to all possible outcomes. This is what I'm envisioning: A place exists where there are only five numbers {1,2,3,4,5}. There are no other numbers, in this place. In other words, the only possibilities are 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. How can we add more possibilities to the set {1,2,3,4,5}?

I don't see how the arrow of time relates to this question.

No, all possibilities is not defined as the inner circle, but the outer circle.
Again, when you say "the outer circle", are you talking about the region between the two circles. The inner circle is part of the outer circle, so whatever the inner circle represents, the outer circle includes that. If you're thinking only about the region between them, then you need to be careful to say that consistently.

I feel like I'm getting closer. However, if your model needs rethinking, and you'd like to put it on the back burner for awhile, I understand. Such is part of the process of formulating a big idea.

5. I thought I replied to this yesterday... I must not have actually posted it.

Originally Posted by mmm4444bot
Okay, but are you still using the circle diagram to express the pattern, or is the circle diagram part of what you've given up?
I am still using the circle diagram, but it has changed slightly. I had a dream last night where I saw a much better picture of how my idea should be represented. The only part of the image I remembered was a small change. It should look like this:

Misc Image Possibilities 2.jpg

I think I need a specific example of a situation, along with some lumped possibilities, to understand what you have in mind. I'm curious to learn more about what sorts of things can be treated as a group.
Going based on the picture above, it's more like you are taking a group sum of possibilities out of infinite possibilities and using those to represent that possibility. In a way it like if you have a line that goes from (0,0) to (6,6) what I am doing is taking points within that line evenly spaced out and they cover until the next section of possibilities. So I might take points in increments of .5 to represent get 12 points. So what I would do is it would look like (0-.5, 0-.5) and the line within the line would go from (0, 0) to [.5, .5] and then the next point would be (.5, .5) to [1, 1].

I'm not following how this shines any light on adding possibilities to a set that already contains every possibility.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your thoughts about adding more possibilities to all possible outcomes. This is what I'm envisioning: A place exists where there are only five numbers {1,2,3,4,5}. There are no other numbers, in this place. In other words, the only possibilities are 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. How can we add more possibilities to the set {1,2,3,4,5}?

I don't see how the arrow of time relates to this question.
Following from my previous comment about taking point that lead to other points, I am not really adding points at all, but I am limiting the amount of points I use from the total of infinite points. So it would more be that there are infinite points and I am limiting and sectioning them into 5 different point, if I am going by your example.

Again, when you say "the outer circle", are you talking about the region between the two circles. The inner circle is part of the outer circle, so whatever the inner circle represents, the outer circle includes that. If you're thinking only about the region between them, then you need to be careful to say that consistently.
Yes, it seems you understand a point I used the wrong wording for.

I feel like I'm getting closer. However, if your model needs rethinking, and you'd like to put it on the back burner for awhile, I understand. Such is part of the process of formulating a big idea.
I am not really sure where this will lead, tbh. I am trying to go into this with more of an open mind in terms of what this theorem could me and am also open into the context of what it might measure.

6. Originally Posted by Quick
I thought I replied to this yesterday... I must not have actually posted it.
I said those very words, a few days ago! I think one of my posts went missing, in another member's thread.

I know for sure that I posted an image, in yet another thread. Now it's gone.

Yesterday, I moved a new member's thread to the appropriate board, but the forum software seems to have sent it into the ether, instead. Thank goodness a copy was still open in the Moderator Control Panel; I was able to forward the text back to the author, by private message.

Maybe you did post something. We experience regular issues with v-Bulletin.

I need to spend more time away from the boards, for awhile. I'll mostly be working behind the scenes (my office is in the sub-basement). I'll return to this thread, in about 10 days.

Cheers

PS: Here's another example of a v-Bulletin bug. I just realized that I had told you in one of your other threads that I would think about a question after I got back from dinner. I forgot about that, until now. I just tried to use v-Bulletin's advanced search function, to get a list of all my posts containing the character string dinner. It says there's only one (from 2012). Baloney!

7. May be you ate only one dinner since 2012 and discussed about it.... can happen ..... just selective reality....

8. ## Tackling the problem of the average of all possibilities being 1.

Let's assume something either happens or doesn't happen. We'll represent something happening as a 1 and nothing happening as a 0.

Now consider that if we have a possibility that could be a 1, then there is a possibility of it being a 0 as well.
You might ask the question "why" or "how do you know this?"
I will answer saying because it assumes an element of probability as opposed to a to a definitive answer.
Then you might ask once again how I know this.
I would say there are two types of knowledge: those that are facts and those that where there is more than one correct answer.
So you could say anything where there is more than one correct answer is something that could either happen or not happen.

Now that we have established that something could either happen or not happen consider:

Say we have an infinite string of 0's and 1's as such:
1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0 ... ect.

Now going back to what I said at the beginning, that if we have a possibility that could be a 1, then there is a possibility of it being a 0 as well.

So then let's say we take the inverse of the first infinite string of 0's and 1's:
0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1

Now suppose we were to take the average of both things that could potentially happen:

1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0 ... ect. +
0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1 ... ect

What do you get?

1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 ... ect.

Now divide that by it's sum..

You would get a 1.

Still working on getting the kinks out of the rest of this, but let me know if that is a decent starting point.

9. Originally Posted by Quick
Let's assume something either happens or doesn't happen. We'll represent something happening as a 1 and nothing happening as a 0.
To confirm, you're thinking of discrete things, here? For each discrete thing, 1 represents that it happens and 0 represents that it does not happen. Is this what you have in mind?

Originally Posted by Quick
Now consider that if we have a possibility that could be a 1, then there is a possibility of it being a 0 as well.
I need to better understand these 1s and 0s.

For example, let's assume that complete decapitation results in biological death. Since death happens, we have a 1, but you're saying that it's also possible that it could be a zero, as well. You explain this because you're assuming an element of probability as opposed to a definitive "answer". What is the question, in this example?

Originally Posted by Quick
I would say there are two types of knowledge: those that are facts and those that where there is more than one correct answer.
Can you list some examples of each type of knowledge?

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•