More or less, everybody has someone who thinks they are the best. More or less, everybody has a testimonial that says they are sweet, kind, helpful, wonderful, gem of a person. More or less, everybody loves, and is loved. Yet, people are different. Even those who believe everyone is basically a good person does not really believe it when they interact with everybody around them. Some are good, some are weird, some are adorable, some are worth ignoring and some are absolute selfish devils. The rest have nothing in them to avoid indifference. To everyone, someone is one of these. Does that eventually make everyone the same, or everyone unique? Or both?
More or less, everyone is trying to get somewhere. Or waiting while everything else around them changes so that they are automatically transported elsewhere. And passively being changed by the gradients of the environment. And actively trying to find themselves and changing for (what they think) the better. Isn't it possible, that in the craziness of all this motion, everything stays randomly distributed, effectively at steady state, effectively remaining the same all the time? Mathematically that would be a good model. Physically, it makes everything so pointless. More or less. But still, despite bursting with examples and arguments to prove otherwise to me, just sit and imagine for a minute a real model like that, or better, don't apply it to what I said...apply it to any plausible system, randomly distributed events in a pseudo steady state that keeps afloat the universe... then tell me what would happen if one of the factors that together create the randomness consciously stops acting an does nothing. Or just fails.
Are we, each one of us, not a factor?
More or less, everyone is trying to get somewhere. Or waiting while everything else around them changes so that they are automatically transported elsewhere. And passively being changed by the gradients of the environment. And actively trying to find themselves and changing for (what they think) the better. Isn't it possible, that in the craziness of all this motion, everything stays randomly distributed, effectively at steady state, effectively remaining the same all the time? Mathematically that would be a good model. Physically, it makes everything so pointless. More or less. But still, despite bursting with examples and arguments to prove otherwise to me, just sit and imagine for a minute a real model like that, or better, don't apply it to what I said...apply it to any plausible system, randomly distributed events in a pseudo steady state that keeps afloat the universe... then tell me what would happen if one of the factors that together create the randomness consciously stops acting an does nothing. Or just fails.
Are we, each one of us, not a factor?
12 comments:
Well it depends on the level of abstraction at which you are trying to fathom the meaning. If you look at higher levels then surely everything remains the same, actions of a person canceling that of the others but as soon as you go at a finer level, then every person is indeed unique, whose actions have effect at least on a small subgroup of people around him.
And this is an absolutely plausible mathematical model. Remember, a non-mathematician does not know when a group of sand particles transforms into a heap of sand, but for a mathematician even no sand particle is a heap of size zero :)
but people are all the same, it's the perception we hold of them vis-a-vis what we are ,makes them different, the inadvertent formation of an 'idea' is all what matters and to what extent the idea is conformed by reality......again of our own understanding....but when it is we afterall, does it really makes a difference to think if one is same, unique or anything else......because afterall we are privy to only one perspective which we believe in, our own.
......
if the variables are independent (as in independent :) )the randomness itself coupled with the practical innumeracy of the factors would obviate a discernible effect......in the long run.....the point being, for every model (especially one like you mention) and its principle equation, if one decides to take certain variables indifferent to others, the simplification is astounding, and the solution is as good as any......after all the conditions are as relevant to arrive at a solution.
but that factor is still very much in the model (perhaps as a constant, now ) ??? apart from the assumption that the events are too random, factors too many :) , the interdependence of two factors is also a point.... the stops acting part may be the equilibrium state. Then the model can easily continue with the premise that it has become a constant part in the model.....if fails, then it ceases to exist by all means and taking it into consideration makes no difference either way.
More or Less, I agree with what is written. After thinking about in spare time only :) Considering us (humans) to be factors who have continuous generation and decay.
If some of the factors stop acting consciously or even unconsciously for that matter, i feel that by the inherent nature of the random distribution some other factor wud take its 'role'. As for humans as the factors 'generation' is a presumption. The original factor moving with zero velocity now. Thus the overall randomness wont be affected.
Also the distribution being random we wont have any definite cordinates for the stopped factors. So there wud be no identity whatsoever of the conscious misfits in the distribution as well.
If the whole of the factors or even if the majority consciously choose to stop acting then I dont think the random distribution would hold true and thus the model wud break down :)
Purely mathematically speaking.... each one of us could be treated as an identical random variable (an iid as they say), with certain high level characteristics (which you mention) defining them... but the actual behaviour of each one of them can be so vastly different..... and yet the overall combined distribution might be constant! Such are the ways of mathematics (and for us... life! :D)
And to answer your question of withdrawing factors..... well, the universe has been there long enough to actually have encountered such phenomena.... so whatever be that equation that answers the question of life, the universe and everything must have, by now, accounted for the same.
PS: After this post... Geek Geek Geek!!!! :D :D
Its just the viewpoint of each individual...when they think about others and when they think about themselves...
Hmmmnn I m stil thinking over it!!
Oho! Ulta chor kotwal ko daante! Who´s the nerd now, huh!
:D
[everyone]
Such heavy replies, my mind needs some time to process. I'd think and write in super-spare time, but thanks.
[akshay, rohan]
It's just conditioning, so a little bit of maths doesnt hurt anyone. It still doesnt flow in my blood. ont brand me!
:P :D
PS: Maths is good... maths is great :D. I wish everything could be described mathematically... wouldn't world be such an awesome place then :D
Big big big picture!
Only in the imagination can our minds wrap around the world so much, and while we're getting knocked around violently in the system every few microseconds, it doesn't matter to us what the big picture is, so I would say nothing is made pointless. And why did you call it a pseudo steady state? From the model is looks dead steady to me..
going by orkut testimonials, the world is full of good hearted souls, helpful, kindhearted, a friend indeed people, until and unless u start living with those people(like roomies or future spouses), u will never realise the truth.
anyways, the world is complete spectrum of all kinds, the ones that are active, that are inactive and also those between these two. people who don't make or dont' want to make a choice have still made a choice by remaining silent..isn't it?? So they are in way responsible for, say a revoltuion that never happened..:P..Was it principle of uncertainity that I read somewhere? something related to probability, random motion, butterfly effect?
Post a Comment