Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discontinuing research about ID
Dubreuil
Member (Idle past 3042 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 04-02-2015


Message 286 of 393 (756931)
04-30-2015 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by NoNukes
04-30-2015 11:10 AM


Re: too many unanswered questions.
NoNukes writes:
There's nothing to see here. I am out.
If you don't want to participate in the discussion, then you don't have to.
NoNukes writes:
Romulans are counted as P.BW instead of P.Wo when the definition of P.BW is "colour black/white, silver, ice, cold, invisible" and the definition of P.Wo includes "hostile aliens"
....
The person P.BW appears wherever a 6 is mentioned or the colour black/white or silver appears.
Sigh...
I assume to keep discussing with you would not a be good idea too. Your comment reveals that you haven't read the paper just as Cat Sci: [Msg=219]. If you don't read the paper, then you can't understand the context. I could post all parts of the paper here, but this would probably comprise about 60 pages. Everyone who became insulting here or stopped discussing didn't read the paper.
Edited by Dubreuil, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by NoNukes, posted 04-30-2015 11:10 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 287 of 393 (756932)
04-30-2015 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by NoNukes
04-30-2015 11:10 AM


Re: too many unanswered questions.
Sigh...
Oh it just gets worse ... I went back to the "pattern" event descriptions in Message 235 and listed all the options for the elements in each event ...

  • OPTION : Event #1 can be SKIPPED; IF NOT Skipped Event #1:Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M2(weapon, "What's that?" = 2 options), M5(water), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), M7(drink), M13(long time), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)-, P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)+, P.Tr(Deanna Troi)+, P.WeC(Wesley Crusher)-. (total 15+8+1+1+1+1+1+3+1+3+2+1+2+1+1+15+8+1+1=67 options)
  • IFF no E1, then OPTION : Event #2 can be SKIPPED, else - IF NOT Skipped - Event #2: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Ri(William Riker), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M4(fire), M5(water), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)-, P.Da(Data)-. (total 15+1+1+1+1+4+1+1+8+1=34 options)
  • IFF no E1 and no E2, then OPTION : Event #3 can be SKIPPED, else - IF NOT Skipped - Event #3: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M3(humour, laughing = 2 options), M5(water), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)+, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)-, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)+. (total 15+8+1+3+1+1+1+3+1+4+3+2+1+2+8+1+3=58 options)
    • OPTION : Events #4 thru 8 can be SKIPPED as a GROUP, else - IF NOT Skipped:
    • Event #4: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), M4(fire), M10(past), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)-. (total 15+3+1+1+15=35 options)
    • Event #5: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M2(weapon, "What's that?" = 2 options), M4(fire), M5(water), M7(drink), M14(short time, in a hurry, smoke, gas = 4 options), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)+, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)-. (total 1+8+1+3+1+1+1+3+4+2+1+1+1+4+8+1+3=44 options)
    • Event #6: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)-, P.Ri(William Riker)-. (total 15+1+3+3+2+1+1= 26 options)
    • Event #7: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options). P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M2(weapon, "What's that?" = 2 options), M4(fire), M7(drink), M14(short time, in a hurry, smoke, gas = 4 options), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)+, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)-. (total 15+1+8+1+3+1+1+1+1+1+3+4+2+1+1+4+8+1+3=60 options)
    • Event #8: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M4(fire), M5(water), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), M10(past), M13(long time), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)-, P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)+, P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options)-, P.LF(Geordi La Forge)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)-, P.Ri(William Riker)-, P.Tr(Deanna Troi)+, P.WeC(Wesley Crusher)-, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)+. (total 8+1+1+1+1+1+3+3+1+1+2+1+1+15+8+3+1+1+1+1+1+3=59 options})
  • Event #9: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M2(weapon, "What's that?" = 2 options), M4(fire), M7(drink), M11(unbelievable attainment), M14(short time, in a hurry, smoke, gas = 4 options), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)+, P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)-, P.Da(Data)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)+, P.Tr(Deanna Troi)-, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)-, P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options)+. (total 15+1+8+1+3+1+1+1+1+1+4+3+2+1+1+1+4+15+1+8+1+1+1+3+4=83 options)
  • OPTION : Event #10 can be SKIPPED, else - IF NOT Skipped - Event #10: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Da(Data), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), P.LF(Geordi La Forge)+, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)+. (total 1+1+1+3+1+4+1+3=15 options)
  • OPTION : Event #11 can be SKIPPED, else - IF NOT Skipped - Event #11: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Da(Data), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Ri(William Riker), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), M7(drink), P.Da(Data)+, P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)-, P.Ri(William Riker)+, P.WeC(Wesley Crusher)-, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)-. (total 1+1+1+1+3+1+3+2+1+1+3+1+1+1+3=24 options)
  • Event #12: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options). P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M2(weapon, "What's that?" = 2 options), M10(past), M12(temporary interruption), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)-, P.Da(Data)-, P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options)+, P.LF(Geordi La Forge)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)+, P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options)-. (total 15+1+8+3+1+1+4+2+1+1+15+1+3+1+1+4=62 options)
  • Event #13: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Da(Data), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Ri(William Riker), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M5(water), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), M7(drink), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)-, P.Da(Data)+, P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)-, P.Ri(William Riker)+, P.Tr(Deanna Troi)-, P.WeC(Wesley Crusher)-, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)-. (total 1+1+1+1+3+1+3+1+2+1+8+1+3+1+1+1+1+3=34 options)
  • Event #14: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M1(open door, black or red = 3 options), M2(weapon, "What's that?" = 2 options), M3(humour, laughing = 2 options), M6(theft, try to get information eg: sensors = 2 options), M7(drink), M13(long time), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)-, P.BeC(Beverly Crusher)-, P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)+, P.Da(Data)-, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)+, P.Ri(William Riker)-, P.WeC(Wesley Crusher)+, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)+, P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options)-. (total 15+1+8+1+1+1+1+1+1+3+1+4+3+2+2+2+1+1+15+1+8+1+1+1+1+3+4=84 options)
  • Event #15: Elements are observed, either singly or in combinations and all with possible repeated appearances -- P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options), P.BeC(Beverly Crusher), P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options), P.Da(Data), P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options), P.LF(Geordi La Forge), P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard), P.Ri(William Riker), P.Tr(Deanna Troi), P.WeC(Wesley Crusher), P.WSA(woman without special abilities), P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options), M4(fire), M12(temporary interruption), M14(short time, in a hurry, smoke, gas = 4 options), P.Al(>5 people, green, big, wide, a lot, lack of knowledge, do nothing, holiday, very old, starships, standby, science, stone, death, or 4 = 15 options)+, P.BW(Romulans(1 to 5?), black, white, silver, ice, cold, invisible, or 6 = 8 options)-, P.Da(Data)+, P.En(energy, lovely, or young woman = 3 options)+, P.LF(Geordi La Forge)+, P.Pi(Jean-Luc Picard)-, P.Ri(William Riker)+, P.Tr(Deanna Troi)-, P.WeC(Wesley Crusher)-, P.Wo(Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons = 3 options)-, P.Ya(Tasha Yar, yellow, earth or 3 = 4 options)+. (total 15+1+8+1+3+1+1+1+1+1+1+4+1+1+4+15++8+1+3+1+1+1+1+1+3+4=83 options)
That's 67 E1 options, 34 E2 options, 58 E3 options, 35 E4 options, 44 E5 options, 26 E6 options, 60 E7 options, 59 E8 options, 83 E9 options, 15 E10 options, 24 E11 options, 62 E12 options, 34 E13 options, 84 E14 options and 83 E15 options ...
If I do that for all the different events and then run those through all the 24 possible variations of combining events into sequences it becomes rather obvious that the number of variations of elements and their combination into sequences would result in an astronomical number of fits.
And I'll bet his "probability calculation" treats them as single entities.
Looks like CatsEye was onto something with replacing the elements with their descriptions.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : corrected, added up all the event options for each event

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by NoNukes, posted 04-30-2015 11:10 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by vimesey, posted 04-30-2015 2:44 PM RAZD has replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 288 of 393 (756940)
04-30-2015 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by RAZD
04-30-2015 12:40 PM


Re: too many unanswered questions.
And I'll bet his "probability calculation" treats them as single entities.
Hi RAZD - I've been trying to follow this from the perspective of a non-mathematician.
Have I got this right - are you saying that Dubreuil is defining as a qualifying event a wide range of possible scenarios (ie you hit the side of the barn somewhere), but then calculates the probability of the specific scenario that does occur (ie the probability that you would hit the specific bullet hole you actually hit) ? In other words, a very convoluted version of the sharpshooter fallacy ?

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by RAZD, posted 04-30-2015 12:40 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by RAZD, posted 04-30-2015 4:58 PM vimesey has not replied

  
Dubreuil
Member (Idle past 3042 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 04-02-2015


Message 289 of 393 (756946)
04-30-2015 4:36 PM


I have a good idea. I will herewith end discussing here, but I will keep discussing in personal conversations. My e-mail is available in an older version of the paper on page 1: http://vixra.org/pdf/1403.0980v1.pdf. Everyone who is still interested in it can write me. The reasons for this decision are easy to understand. I never liked the Internet or Religion, both are full of hatred. I gave this discussion a second chance in [Msg=231], but impolite people as Cat Sci are still commenting here. The quality of discussion here is low. I approximated the probability of the pattern in [Msg=190] but no one ever referred to this. Seemingly no one read the paper, even RAZD still becomes surprised about what he reads in the paper. If I limit the discussion to an e-mail discussion, then I can block every insulting person I want. No one is blocking here anything.
I'm really a peaceful human. I don't like offending. I come from an academic environment in Germany, no one offends me there. To limit this discussion to personal discussions will be a good idea to lock out all the insulting persons.

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by RAZD, posted 04-30-2015 5:08 PM Dubreuil has not replied
 Message 295 by subbie, posted 05-01-2015 3:26 PM Dubreuil has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 290 of 393 (756947)
04-30-2015 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by vimesey
04-30-2015 2:44 PM


Re: too many unanswered questions.
Have I got this right - are you saying that Dubreuil is defining as a qualifying event a wide range of possible scenarios (ie you hit the side of the barn somewhere), but then calculates the probability of the specific scenario that does occur (ie the probability that you would hit the specific bullet hole you actually hit) ? In other words, a very convoluted version of the sharpshooter fallacy ?
Well he also paints bulls-eyes on the house, the car, the tractor and the cat to make sure he doesn't miss one.
And some of those elements are just colors ... something you never see on color tv shows, right?
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by vimesey, posted 04-30-2015 2:44 PM vimesey has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 291 of 393 (756949)
04-30-2015 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by Dubreuil
04-30-2015 4:36 PM


I have a good idea. I will ...
... declare victory and run away from the comments that raise serious questions about basic honest and rigorous approaches to doing such "studies" ...
... even RAZD still becomes surprised about what he reads in the paper. ...
Curiously, I would say I am amazed at the deception you have created -- apparently it fooled you.
... then I can block every insulting person I want. No one is blocking here anything.
And that's the difference between having an open discussion on the merits of the paper and having a closed discussion where you only admit those who don't criticize your fantasy document.
Calling you paper bogus is not insulting, it is accurate.
Frankly I care more about all the ant frass in antarctica than I do about your responses, especially when you cling to clear fallacies than admit to error.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Dubreuil, posted 04-30-2015 4:36 PM Dubreuil has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


(4)
Message 292 of 393 (756952)
04-30-2015 5:38 PM


I was about to read that mess.
I held off when I saw Omnivorous state it smacked of numerology.
I guess when all you have is a hammer every problem begins to look like a nail.
Edited by 1.61803, : added {off}

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by NoNukes, posted 04-30-2015 9:29 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 293 of 393 (756959)
04-30-2015 9:29 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by 1.61803
04-30-2015 5:38 PM


Yes, it is numerology
I held off when I saw Omnivorous state it smacked of numerology.
What if a triune God communicated us via Star Trek episodes? Let's do some notating and calculating and see.
or
What if God talked to us via Bible Codes?
Let's do some notating and calculating and see.
Is there really any thing hugely different in these two endeavors?

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by 1.61803, posted 04-30-2015 5:38 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by subbie, posted 05-01-2015 3:28 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
Dubreuil
Member (Idle past 3042 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 04-02-2015


Message 294 of 393 (756993)
05-01-2015 1:18 PM


I didn't "declare" victory. Why should I want to "win" this? There is nothing to win here. Even if someone would agree here, then it wouldn't help to find a peer-review for it. I don't know why everyone is talking here about bulls. Everywhere I can find bullspit, bullshit or bulleyes. The pattern was created already one year ago in the old version of the paper. Afterwards it was tested for a references about a triune God in the new version of the paper. To claim I travelled back in time to make the old paper fit with the data is nonsense. I don't claim a "win", but no one here read the paper or was really concerned with it. For example it took RAZD until [Msg=228] until he noticed the sentence "At the events 1, 3, 4 and 5 the pattern is allowed to start" on page 6. He stated in [Msg=235]:
RAZD writes:
I assume you mean that it would always fit with every data source? The probability was tested to 0.625 to fit with random data and calculated to <0.711 in Message 190. If you are agreeing with this calculation and the test, then you would expect only a 14 out of 23 fit.
Curiously I think your calculations are flawed by not properly accounting for the multiple (32) patterns within your overall pattern, any one of which can be fit by the new season episodes.
If he had read [Msg=190], then he would have known that the approximation was calculated for multiple patterns. I don't know why he didn't read the paper. I don't know why he didn't read this messages and never referred to them. I only know no one can estimate a paper without having read the paper or this messages.
An other example is Cat Sci. He answered the four questions in [Msg=196] with:
quote:
1. Do you agree there is an coincidental contribution?
2. Do you agree that a coincidental contribution will change the row of appearances?
3. Do you agree that a change in the row of appearances will cause the pattern to not fit sometimes?
4. Do you agree that if the pattern doesn't fit that often, then the pattern will have only a low residual uncertainty like 1:10^2?
If all this questions are answered with Yes, then the involvement of chance precludes a pattern with a residual uncertainty of 1:10^7 because: 1.->2.->3.->4.
Cat Ski writes:
You can put me down for 4 yes's.
But then in [Msg=280] he changed his opinion:
Cat Ski writes:
and always pointing back to that same old nonsense: "The involvement of chance precludes a pattern with a residual uncertainty of 1:10^7."
The comments here are not elaborated and the questions which are asked show me that the most parts of the paper are still unknown to the most persons here. I don't claim "victory". I merely state that no one here has participated in a worthwhile discussion until now. And nearly everyone is insulting here or loves excrements or bulls. One year ago the paper had only 29 pages. Then it was sent to person with the necessary background during the last year. Now the paper has 58 pages. Unfortunately the most criticism here resulted out of a lack of knowledge about the paper. I could maybe declare myself ready to keep explaining here for further months, but this place is to insulting. I don't want to read offensive comments or comments about excrements anymore. Again, I don't claim victory, this place is just not suited to maintain a non-offensive discussion in which I could explain or post more parts of the paper. I will limit explanations to personal discussions therefore.

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 295 of 393 (757001)
05-01-2015 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by Dubreuil
04-30-2015 4:36 PM


Dumbreuil writes:
I have a good idea.
Given what I've seen in this thread, I find that claim highly unlikely.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Dubreuil, posted 04-30-2015 4:36 PM Dubreuil has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 296 of 393 (757004)
05-01-2015 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by NoNukes
04-30-2015 9:29 PM


Re: Yes, it is numerology
NoNukes writes:
Is there really any thing hugely different in these two endeavors?
At least with one you get to watch some entertaining television.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by NoNukes, posted 04-30-2015 9:29 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 297 of 393 (757008)
05-01-2015 3:42 PM


Moderator On Duty
Please discuss the topic and not each other. Declaring someone wrong is only justified once they've been shown wrong. One doesn't have to explore every cranny of a hall of mirrors to know that that's what it is. Things that make sense and are supported by evidence can be explained and made clear to others. Someone with a sound sense of science would recognize that valid criticisms exist on more levels than just the mathematical: absence of mathematical mistakes is just a prerequisite and by itself demonstrates nothing.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 298 of 393 (757016)
05-01-2015 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 285 by Dubreuil
04-30-2015 12:29 PM


cleanup of loose ends
You misunderstood this. All 24 possible variation can be observed, but only 4 can be observed for one row of appearances. There are 4 possible variations for one quantisation. If there are 24 quantisations, then all 24 variations can be possibly observed.
This doesn't make any sense to me -- can anyone explain what he means?
For season 3, 4, 5 and 6 there are only appearances and affected persons noted that trigger the next event. *P.Al and *P.Tr were not mentioned therefore.
In other words the data presented is incomplete, and only the data that supports the presumed "pattern" is provided, the rest is ignored.
RAZD writes:
Does *P.Wo as Lt Worf shooting a *P.Wo as a "hostile alien" count as P.Wo-?
If there are more than 13 persons, then a 14th person can appear as an already present person. For example P.Wo.
This demonstrates the primary problem with the way the elements are defined with so much ambiguity: you can have P.Wo (Worf) in a battle with P.Wo(Klingons) and one wins (P.Wo+) and the other loses (P.Wo-), then P.Wo(hostile aliens) come to the aid of the losing side (P.Wo+).
And again we see that the data in the appendix is not a record of what was observed (Lt Worf, hostile aliens or Klingons) but the category that arbitrarily combines them (P.Wo)
RAZD writes:
one that is so flexible that it covers thousands of different sequences of diverse things
Yes, and it also doesn't fit with thousands of different sequences of diverse things. For two sequences that fit, there is about one sequence that doesn't fit.
Curiously I don't think you realize the problem inherent in having 24 to 84 different items that make up your events causing such an open ended system that matches to your events is almost a foregone conclusion -- and that even when that fails to fit the pattern you adjust the pattern so that events can be skipped ... and you have no list of elements that would invalidate the "pattern" and no record of anything that isn't part of one of your element.
Things like the color blue are not recorded in the data (as you haven't tagged that to an element) so we don't know from your record of the data whether blue occurred or not, even though it would be an element that is not part of the sequence and would therefore invalidate it. You have "cherry-picked" what you record as data so that it supports your "pattern" ... this is neither an honest nor a rigorous table of data.
When you look at the number of options for each element and compare that to them being recorded from 76 episodes it is easy to see why you always get E9 (83 options), E14 (84 options) and E15 (83 options) because of the way they are packed and stacked.
Message 287: That's 67 E1 options, 34 E2 options, 58 E3 options, 35 E4 options, 44 E5 options, 26 E6 options, 60 E7 options, 59 E8 options, 83 E9 options, 15 E10 options, 24 E11 options, 62 E12 options, 34 E13 options, 84 E14 options and 83 E15 options ...
Message 281: ... when I do the same counting of your pattern variations for the first season I find 8 variations observed (16 possibilities not observe).
And I have now expanded this analysis for the third season (the second season is skipped) data you provided in appendix A:
and now I have added season 4, the third one used to make\create\manufacture the "pattern"
Event variation #1 observed 0 times (E1,E2,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #2 observed 0 times (E1,E2,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #3 observed 0 times (E1,E2,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #4 observed 0 times (E1,E2,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #5 observed 2 times (E1,E2,E3,,,,,,E9,E10,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #6 observed 0 times (E1,E2,E3,,,,,,E9,E10,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #7 observed 6 times (E1,E2,E3,,,,,,E9,,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #8 observed 3 times (E1,E2,E3,,,,,,E9,,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #9 observed 0 times (,,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #10 observed 0 times (,,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #11 observed 3 times (,,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #12 observed 1 times (,,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #13 observed 0 times (,,E3,,,,,,E9,E10,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #14 observed 2 times (,,E3,,,,,,E9,E10,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #15 observed 23 times (,,E3,,,,,,E9,,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #16 observed 5 times (,,E3,,,,,,E9,,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #17 observed 0 times (,,,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #18 observed 1 times (,,,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #19 observed 12 times (,,,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #20 observed 2 times (,,,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #21 observed 0 times (,,,,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #22 observed 2 times (,,,,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,E10,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #23 observed 12 times (,,,,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,E11,E12,E13,E14,E15)
Event variation #24 observed 2 times (,,,,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9,,,E12,E13,E14,E15)
out of 76 total episodes (episode 1x02 is a continuation of 1x01 and episode 4x01 is a continuation of 3x26)
→ 10 of the 24 possible cases were not observed
→ 14 of the 24 possible cases were observed in two seasons of data
Note that this is two more cases observed than before (and I predicted there would be an increase ... in order to force a pattern onto the data) ... and that the base pattern (#1) has the most overall options for being found (67!*34!*58!*35!*44!*26!*60!*59!*83!*15!*24!*62!*34!*84!*83! = 1.2610^1030 optional "fit" variations ..), and yet it wasn't found once in the 76 episodes ... this should be your first clue that there is no real pattern.
What makes it seem like a pattern is the incorporation of skips between events when an element, el(x) does not fit the current event, E(n) or the next chronological event, E(n+1) ... because the way the data is recorded and the way items are incorporated into elements and the way the elements are grouped in the events is guaranteed to find a following Event, E(q) that "fits", so the only way you get a failure is if that skip has not been built into the 24 variations.
The second clue should be that the most common variation found (#15 occurs 23 out of 76 episodes, or 30%) uses one of the shortest variations: only 7 of the 15 events (47%) of the event series .
Finally, that only 14 of the possible 24 variations (58%) are actually observed should be your third clue that the "pattern" is an artifact of the construction of the pattern and not an actual pattern in the tv series. Logically , if the variations are necessary, then there should be at least one of every case found in 76 episodes. Put another way, 42% of the "pattern" is unnecessary.
GIGO imho.
Message 1: I spent a few years to actually test the predictions of intelligent design at the present time A paper with about 60 pages and 9 appendices resulted (About Testing Intelligent Design at the Present Time and References About a Triune God, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:1504.0033) that supports the theory of ID.
The paper does not test any predictions of, or provide and support to, intelligent design as the paper fails to demonstrate what it claims. The data documented is not usable because it is incomplete, skipping over many items, and it is preprocessed into element groups rather that the raw data; any data that does not fit is not reported. The grouping of optional items into elements, and of optional elements into events, and of optional events into pattern variations, is haphazard and arbitrary, with no rhyme or reason. No rationale is provided for these choices, nor is their opportunity to judge whether they are subjective or objective classifications.
If the authors learn anything from this paper, it should be how not to do one.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by Dubreuil, posted 04-30-2015 12:29 PM Dubreuil has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by Dubreuil, posted 05-02-2015 1:15 PM RAZD has replied

  
Dubreuil
Member (Idle past 3042 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 04-02-2015


Message 299 of 393 (757066)
05-02-2015 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by RAZD
05-01-2015 5:20 PM


Re: cleanup of loose ends
Unfortunately your comments are still full with mistakes. For example you will find a record of elements that would invalidate the pattern in [Msg=190] for E1. For all the other E's there is a summation. For example: "fit with the pattern: *:12; +/-:6; M's:7" and "doesn't fit with the pattern: *:1; +/-:20: M's:5". Your other comments also reveal that you haven't read the paper completely. It would still take a long time to explain all this to you what you haven't understood by now. But as stated before, this place is too offensive to take part again in an extensive discussion. You also became somehow offensive. GIGO means "garbage in, garbage out". I would not call your comments garbage. I would only show you your mistakes. This paper was revised multiple times during the last year through comments from people who really was concerned with the paper. If there wouldn't have been that much comments about it from April 2014 to March 2015, then it could not have been extended and revised that often. Therefore I'm really sure that the content of the paper is correct. I know all the real weaknesses in the old versions of the paper which were corrected during the last year. The comments here are offensive and rarely well elaborated. I don't blame anyone for this comments. It takes a long time to read the paper completely and to understand it. Without the background it takes even longer. I could maybe declare myself ready to keep explaining here for further months, but this place is too insulting. I will limit explanations to personal discussions therefore. I won't promise I will never post here again. For example if there is one day a journal which accepts a mathematical paper about ID and it is published, then I will post here the journal reference.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by RAZD, posted 05-01-2015 5:20 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Admin, posted 05-02-2015 1:56 PM Dubreuil has not replied
 Message 301 by RAZD, posted 05-02-2015 3:20 PM Dubreuil has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 300 of 393 (757072)
05-02-2015 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 299 by Dubreuil
05-02-2015 1:15 PM


Re: cleanup of loose ends
Dubreuil writes:
But as stated before, this place is too offensive to take part again in an extensive discussion. You also became somehow offensive.
Please discuss the topic and not other people.
GIGO means "garbage in, garbage out". I would not call your comments garbage.
I think you're having a language problem. GIGO does stand for "garbage in, garbage out", but that's a common catchphrase that means, "If the data's no good then the even the best math produces wrong answers." It isn't equating you or your comments to garbage.
This paper was revised multiple times during the last year through comments from people who really was concerned with the paper. If there wouldn't have been that much comments about it from April 2014 to March 2015, then it could not have been extended and revised that often. Therefore I'm really sure that the content of the paper is correct.
That your paper has been through any review process by qualified people is not apparent to anyone here. It's hard to believe that any qualified person would have failed to point out the fatal flaw in assuming randomness in TV episode introductions, or to call to your attention the lack of any connection between your "research" on the one hand and ID and a triune God on the other.
That you're for the most part ignoring such criticisms is causing people to become more strident. Putting one's hands over one's ears is why people begin shouting. You've even been ignoring this moderator, making it very difficult for me to help discussion along. You complained about Dr Adequate who felt you were ignoring his criticisms, but you were ignoring me at the same time. I posted that I would allow Dr Adequate's posts until I obtained a response from you. But did you respond to me, or to anyone else about the fundamental criticisms? No. You're the primary cause of your own difficulties.
It takes a long time to read the paper completely and to understand it. Without the background it takes even longer.
There's nothing particularly difficult to understand about your paper, and it requires no special background. The errors it makes are simple and fundamental. If you're serious about improving your paper then you'll stay and work through the problems.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by Dubreuil, posted 05-02-2015 1:15 PM Dubreuil has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024