Entropy

.

Sorry I've been gone girls (just reading something about Abdo using he instead of he/she, so there). I moved from California back to Ohio, and now am on a labtop mac. UGH! So ab, I skimmed your complaint about my glazed over explination. Since you can obviously read and type, go find the name of the theorem I gave you, go to www.google.com, and paste it in. Read.

Good riddle Faye. I should have gotten that, as I knew a kid with both a mother and father as medical doctors. Oh well, at least my sense of pride wont be completely destroyed, as (like you said) my answer COULD have been right. I just didn't know what kind of role you were challenging, I suppose. Ah well, enough excuses.

Oh, and I believe the answer to the riddle was the word "gry" which means 1/8 inch (or maybe .008 inch, haven't been paying attention recently). Don't know if this still works, since it might not be a word any more. Who defines what is and what isn't a word? Webster? Oxford? (in english, in these cases) is it just a common understanding? Do I not know? (no, I don't).

And here i've been wondering if you were in Color Crayons for the winter holidays or some such around the Rockies. Welcome back!!!

Yes, gry is correct...i answered it as such (1/8 inch that is); it is an "archaic" term, b.c.? b.b.c.?

Thanks az! Sadly I've just got this laptop to work with, rather than a desk top. So now I hit all the wrong keys when I type. It stinks. I suppose I'd better get used to it, though.

what does being "archaic" mean in this case? Is it still a word, just one we don't use or was it a word and isn't anymore?

Oh, and anyone who wants to ask more about mathematical theories, will still get answers, although don't expect me to go in depth on every detail. I'm not getting paid after all.

Hey! You didn't answer my question from earlier on quantum. :p I think archaic means that nobody uses it anymore. I don't suppose they can stop you, but then you might as well use whatever terms you like for things.

Anyway, back to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle!

Instead of "archaic" you could use "ancient" I think. Meaning very old.

This thing's floating to the bottom, so I'm picking it up, brushing it off, and writing some more stuff. I read this article about this professor at Yale who has this theory, that chances are, we are all fictional character's in some futuristic kid's computer game. Theory goes, in the future, computers and game characters will just keep getting more and more independent, until eventually they begin to think for themselves. The idea is that we could well be such characters, and what are the chances we are actually in the real world? I think it's all bulls*** personally, but worth sticking up here anyway.

But then, wouldn't the computer games be fictional as well?

There's one real world, in the theory, and millions of fake technological ones controlled by kids sitting at a desk somewhere playing a computer game. like i said, it's a stupid theory.

But by that logic, the 'real' world would be impossible to locate.

exactly. So you don't know if you're in the real world or the fake. Since there are millions of fakes, and only one real world, chances are ours is fake.

I wonder if the universe really IS beige.

should it be?

apparently.

I'm pretty sure it's black.