Which idea? You seem to have heavily edited your post after I replied; I remember it as being much shorter. I specifically meant
> I know that's the model, but what if it's inaccurate/only a part of the picture? What if the information is elsewhere and we don't know how to measure it?
"What if the information is elsewhere"... well, there's a lot of possible elsewheres. Without some kind of specifics, that's "not even wrong", not because I'm so much smarter than you or so much more of an expert, but because there's nothing there to let anyone be able to determine whether it's right or wrong.
By "elsewhere", I mean the word that you used. What did you mean by that word? Without a specific, you've got something that sounds like stoner physics: "Dude, what if, like, the information is, like, still there, man? What if it just, like, went elsewhere, man?" That's not something that we intelligently interact with. You introduced the word; what did you mean?
But... What if dark matter is the "elsewhere"? (No, I don't have any idea how that would work. Nor do I necessarily think that this is a sane idea. But it's a candidate for "elsewhere" that kind of seems to fit with the course of the discussion.)
Yes, I edited it but I hadn’t seen your reply at that time. I didn’t edit to confuse you! Just to add more details in rebuttal of the points of the other commenter above. Well, I’ll read your answer and get back to you in a bit. Thanks for replying! I wondered if you were an alt of adepts and got mad at me! Haha! :)
Yeah I get your point now. I did a big edit to add more points and forgot I had used that word. So to address your points:
> but because there's nothing there to let anyone be able to determine whether it's right or wrong.
Oh, I see what you're saying. Well I think it's more like...in this theory, we can leave the 'where is the information' question reasonably open right now. We don't have to pin it down. I'm OK with that.
It's the other things that are important to me for now. Information, time. It seems you didn't get those?
I think there's enough there if you read the thread. If you just want to take one thing out of context as you're too lazy to ready back, then blame me when it's not easy for you to explain, you're just picking on people. Blaming them for your own shit, that's not good.
> stoner physics
That's not very nice, tho. Like, why do you have to denigrate it? I get that it sounds that way to you, but that's not how it is. You find there what you bring to it, and you could just as easily engage intelligently with the elsewhere if you respected me by thinking: Okay, it's an unknown for now, I respect that.
Or even better, Wow that's interesting. Let me think about that, maybe I can propose some ideas. That would have been constructive. It seems your idea of "intelligently engage" is to have everything handed to you, and if it's not, take out your own laziness to think, by abusing other people. That's not good, AnimalMuppet.
It's you who didn't engage intelligently with this. That's not my fault, that's on you. Why did you have to take the conversation in this direction? You could have simply made a good contribution.
With someone who has already disrespected my views, that I shared openly and vulnerably, how do you think I'm going to feel exposing more of my ideas to someone who is already ridiculing them? You're not a very nice person, are you?
AnimalMuppet. I'm guessing from the capitalization, you're not a guy. You capitalize to make yourself louder because you don't feel heard here, in this "culture", but you come here because you think you should be heard. But you can't get over that pain, so if you see someone or something you think is a little bit weak, you want to unjustifiably take out your pain on them, to compensate for how you're not getting the respect here, in this "culture", that you think you deserve.
I feel sorry for you that you didn't have a great experience here, but don't take it out on random people to you, like me. I don't have anything to do with you. In fact you shouldn't be taking it out on anyone, you should just be dealin' with that, yourself, rather than being a bitch. Simple, don't you think? Haha! :)
> I know that's the model, but what if it's inaccurate/only a part of the picture? What if the information is elsewhere and we don't know how to measure it?
"What if the information is elsewhere"... well, there's a lot of possible elsewheres. Without some kind of specifics, that's "not even wrong", not because I'm so much smarter than you or so much more of an expert, but because there's nothing there to let anyone be able to determine whether it's right or wrong.
By "elsewhere", I mean the word that you used. What did you mean by that word? Without a specific, you've got something that sounds like stoner physics: "Dude, what if, like, the information is, like, still there, man? What if it just, like, went elsewhere, man?" That's not something that we intelligently interact with. You introduced the word; what did you mean?
But... What if dark matter is the "elsewhere"? (No, I don't have any idea how that would work. Nor do I necessarily think that this is a sane idea. But it's a candidate for "elsewhere" that kind of seems to fit with the course of the discussion.)