# The fallacy of “all the information”

But if $\pi$ is truly infinite and non-repeating, then I think that means all the information in the universe is contained inside.

.

This is nonsense because:

1. That means it includes also false information.

2. Who can access those pieces of information?

• If no observer can access, that is equivalent to no information.

• If an observer needs to work to filter true or useful information from “all the information” inside $\pi$, that is equivalent to a normal information gathering process without $\pi$.

3. Assume that in a lottery, you have to choose the correct 6 numbers among 49 to win. If you say “number 1 to 49 contains all the 6 numbers that would win” but do not specify which 6, it is useless.

all information ~ no information

— Me@2023.01.28 11:12:46 PM

.

The ONLY information that $\pi$ contains is that there is a circle.

— Me@2023.01.29 10:26:54 AM

.

.

# 地獄之路 3

Good intentions 3

.

— 老殘遊記

.

（JC: 不記得何時，看過一個紀錄片，主持人到非洲做義工。

.

— Me@2022.09.13 12:01:08 PM

.

.

# 靈感天線

Amazing Gags 4.3

.

— 臥虎藏龍

— Me@2022-02-15 01:03:23 PM

.

.

# Final Fantasy X

.

Shortly before arriving, Tidus learns that he, Jecht, and the Zanarkand they hail from are summoned entities akin to aeons based on the original Zanarkand and its people. Long ago, the original Zanarkand battled Bevelle in a machina war, in which the former was defeated. Zanarkand’s survivors became “fayth” so that they could use their memories of Zanarkand to create a new city in their image, removed from the reality of Spira. Once they reach Zanarkand, Yunalesca—the first summoner to defeat Sin and unsent ever since—tells the group that the Final Aeon is created from the fayth of one close to the summoner. After defeating Sin, the Final Aeon kills the summoner and transforms into a new Sin, which has caused its cycle of rebirth to continue. The group decides against using the Final Aeon, due to the futile sacrifices it carries and the fact that Sin would still be reborn. Yunalesca tries to kill Tidus’ group, but she is defeated and vanishes, ending hope of ever attaining the Final Aeon.

— Wikipedia on Final Fantasy X

.

.

2022.02.04 Friday ACHK

# 魚目混珠 1.2

Pure evil does no harm, because if someone is purely evil, everyone will know that and avoid him.

It is the evilness of a good man that creates big harm.

The evilness of great man creates the biggest harm.

.

An organization cannot be purely evil.

Anything purely evil cannot be big, because being big requires consistency, which requires good.

— Me@2011.10.11

— Me@2022-01-08

.

.

# Book Underlining Principle

.

When you are reading, you would underline key words. At one extreme, you underline nothing. So you wouldn’t know which parts are important. At the opposite extreme, you underline everything. Then you also wouldn’t know which parts are important. So the effect of underlining nothing is exactly the same as underlining everything.

This is an example of the principle that

The extreme of Yin is Yang

The extreme of Yang is Yin

That is why I call the principle the Book Underlining Principle.

The source of this principle is that when you push something to one extreme at the object level, that action may also push it to the opposite extreme at the meta level.

For example, when you underlining all the words, at the object level, it means that everything is important. However, at the meta level, “being important” must be relative to something else. You need to distinguish the important words from the unimportant ones. When you underlining all the words, there is no such distinction. So “being important” has become meaningless.

— Me@2021-12-13 11:08 AM

— Me@2021-12-26 03:39 PM

.

.

# Eternal return, 2

A “perfect copy” is not a “copy”, because if a copy is perfect, it would be logically indistinguishable from the original.

In other words, we would not be able to determine which one is the “copy” and which one is the “original”, even in principle.

There would be no meaningful difference between the meanings of the labels “copy” and “original”.

— Me@2013-08-11 1:38 PM

.

.

# 太極滅世戰

.

「間書原理」的意思，其實是「陽之極為陰；陰之極為陽」。但那不易理解，所以，我在十多年前，舉了「間書」的例子：

— Me@2003-2004

— 改編自李天命先生

.

（問：「不理成績」而又要「盡情發揮」？自相矛盾也？）

.

Wikipedia
public domain image

— Me@2020-04-13 06:58:18 PM

.

.

# The problem of induction 3.3

“Everything has no patterns” (or “there are no laws”) creates a paradox.

.

If “there are 100% no first order laws”, then it is itself a second order law (the law of no first-order laws), allowing you to use probability theory.

In this sense, probability theory is a second order law: the law of “there are 100% no first order laws”.

In this sense, probability theory is not for a single event, but statistical, for a meta-event: a collection of events.

Using meta-event patterns to predict the next single event, that is induction.

.

Induction is a kind of risk minimization.

— Me@2012-11-05 12:23:24 PM

.

.

# The problem of induction 3.1.2

Square of opposition

.

“everything has a pattern”?

“everything follows some pattern” –> no paradox

“everything follows no pattern” –> paradox

— Me@2012.11.05

.

My above statements are meaningless, because they lack a precise meaning of the word “pattern”. In other words, whether each statement is correct or not, depends on the meaning of “pattern”.

In common usage, “pattern” has two possible meanings:

1. “X has a pattern” can mean that “X has repeated data“.

Since the data set X has repeated data, we can simplify X’s description.

For example, there is a die. You throw it a thousand times. The result is always 2. Then you do not have to record a thousand 2’s. Instead, you can just record “the result is always 2”.

2. “X has a pattern” can mean that “X’s are totally random, in the sense that individual result cannot be precisely predicted“.

Since the data set X is totally random, we can simplify the description using probabilistic terms.

For example, there is a die. You throw it a thousand times. The die lands on any of the 6 faces 1/6 of the times. Then you do not have to record those thousand results. Instead, you can just record “the result is random” or “the die is fair”.

— Me@2018-12-18 12:34:58 PM

.

.

# The problem of induction 3.2

The meaning of induction is that

we regard, for example, that

“AAAAA –> the sixth is also A”

is more likely than

“AA –> the second is also A”

We use induction to find “patterns”. However, the induced results might not be true. Then, why do we use induction at all?

There is everything to win but nothing to lose.

— Hans Reichenbach

If the universe has some patterns, we can use induction to find those patterns.

But if the universe has no patterns at all, then we cannot use any methods, induction or else, to find any patterns.

.

However, to find patterns, besides induction, what are the other methods?

What is meaning of “pattern-finding methods other than induction”?

— Me@2012.11.05

— Me@2018.12.10

.

.

# The problem of induction 3

.

In a sense (of the word “pattern”), there is always a pattern.

.

Where if there are no patterns, everything is random?

Then we have a meta-pattern; we can use probability laws:

In that case, every (microscopic) case is equally probable. Then by counting the possible number of microstates of each macrostate, we can deduce that which macrostate is the most probable.

.

Where if not all microstates are equally probable?

Then it has patterns directly.

For example, we can deduce that which microstate is the most probable.

— Me@2012.11.05

.

.

# 神的旨意 2.4

.

.

.

.

.

— Me@2018-09-02 03:05:45 PM

.

.

# Laplace’s Determinism

If everything is determined (by its causes), there is no free will.

If everything is random (aka not determined), there is also no free will.

If there is free will, it is neither cases.

— Me@2011.08.20

— Me@2018-02-27

.

.

# Creative constraints

Imagine you were asked to invent something new. It could be whatever you want, made from anything you choose, in any shape or size. That kind of creative freedom sounds so liberating, doesn’t it? Or … does it?

If you’re like most people you’d probably be paralyzed by this task. Why?

Brandon Rodriguez explains how creative constraints actually help drive discovery and innovation.

With each invention, the engineers demonstrated an essential habit of scientific thinking – that solutions must recognize the limitations of current technology in order to advance it.

Understanding constraints guides scientific progress, and what’s true in science is also true in many other fields.

Constraints aren’t the boundaries of creativity, but the foundation of it.

— The power of creative constraints

— Lesson by Brandon Rodriguez

— animation by CUB Animation

— TED-Ed

.

We cannot change anything until we accept it. Condemnation does not liberate, it oppresses.

— Carl Jung

.

.

# Twelve-step program

A twelve-step program is a set of guiding principles outlining a course of action for recovery from addiction, compulsion, or other behavioral problems. Originally proposed by Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) as a method of recovery from alcoholism, the Twelve Steps were first published in the 1939 book Alcoholics Anonymous: The Story of How More Than One Hundred Men Have Recovered from Alcoholism. The method was adapted and became the foundation of other twelve-step programs.

As summarized by the American Psychological Association, the process involves the following:

– recognizing a higher power that can give strength;

– examining past errors with the help of a sponsor (experienced member);

– making amends for these errors;

– learning to live a new life with a new code of behavior;

– helping others who suffer from the same alcoholism, addictions or compulsions.

— Wikipedia on Twelve-step program

.

We cannot change anything until we accept it. Condemnation does not liberate, it oppresses.

— Carl Jung

.

.

# 深淵 2

— 尼采

.

.

As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy.

— Christopher Dawson

.

.

2018.02.16 Friday ACHK

# Utopia

So why bother with all this pessimism?

Because at their heart, dystopias
are cautionary tales,

or technology,

but the very idea that humanity can be
molded into an ideal shape.

Think back to the perfect world
you imagined.

Did you also imagine what it would
take to achieve?

How would you make people cooperate?

And how would you make sure it lasted?

Now take another look.

Does that world still seem perfect?

— How to recognize a dystopia

— Alex Gendler

— animation by TED-Ed

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

2018.01.23 Tuesday ACHK

# Then and Now

The most distant a memory, the blurrier it is.

If a memory was completely vivid, you would not be able to distinguish between then and now.

— Westworld (TV series)

— paraphrased

— Me@2018-01-13 10:43:04 AM

# 注定外傳 2.5

Can it be Otherwise? 2.5 | The Beginning of Time, 7.2

4. 即使可以追溯到「時間的起點」（第一因），所謂的「可以」，只是宏觀而言，決不會細節到可以推斷到，你有沒有自由，明天七時起牀。

（問：如果因果環環緊扣，即使細節不完全知道，至少理論上，我們可以知道，如果「第一因」本身有自由，那其他個別事件，就有可能有（來自「第一因」的）自由；如果連「第一因」也沒有自由，那其他個別事件，都一律沒有自由。

「第一因有自由。」

「第一因」根據定義，是沒有原因的。亦即是話，「時間的起點」，再沒有「之前」。而「有自由」，就即是「有其他可能性」。所以，「第一因有自由」的意思是，

「第一因還有其他的可能性。」

（問：如果有「造物主」，祂不就是那個誰，可以從宇宙之初的不同可能性中，選擇一個去實現嗎？）

「因果是否真的『環環緊扣』，有沒有可能，有『同因不同果』的情況？」

— Me@2016-03-15 08:43:58 AM