From: Hara Ra (harara@shamanics.com)
Date: Fri Aug 08 1997 - 20:45:13 MDT
John K Clark wrote:
> >for example the word 'googol' describes a Real number but not a
> >Preal one.
>
> Why, because there is not a googol of anything?
Yup
> If Tipler is correct a beam of
> light could circumnavigate the universe a googol times, in fact an infinite
> number of times between now and the Big Crunch, light moves at the same speed
> but the trip keeps getting shorter without limit.
>
> > 1 bit per proton.
>
> No reason in theory one proton couldn't store far more than one bit.
It's very tempting to snipe at Tipler and how many bits per proton, but
this diverges from my point. Even if the Universe has infinite data
storage capacities (which aleph is the next question here), we have no
reasonable idea how to exploit such properties. Preal is a concept for
the present time, without waiting for the last femtonanopico...second of
the Big Crunch (for which the evidence is to say the least, sparse),
prayers to St Bekenstein, or technologies capable of more than one bit
per proton. A goolgol provides for about 10^20 bits per proton anyway.
My goals here are:
1. To eliminate the confusion when the Platonists begin to confuse the
names and symbols they use with the things themselves.
2. To begin to understand the limitations placed on our thought by the
physical nature of the universe.
Or, to ask a really un-Extropian question:
What really are the bounds of expansion?
O---------------------------------O
| Hara Ra <harara@shamanics.com> |
| Box 8334 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 |
O---------------------------------O
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:42 MST