Coherent Nonsense

This board is NOT restricted access. Keep that in mind when you post.

Moderator: Other Stuff Mods

Coherent Nonsense

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:04 pm

You can blame this thread on EarthRise.

RULES: well, sorta rulish, but in a non-dogmatic manner...

1: Reply to the person above you. This isn't so much a multiperson conversation as it is a really messed up collaborative Q and A/research project.

2: Try to make what you say be coherent in and of itself. It need not be coherent when compared with observable reality.


Here's the conversation that started it all...
EarthRise wrote:It's a common misconception. It takes a little bit of training to distinguish pigeon shit from that which composes chaos throughout every star system in the expanse.

Did you also know that Cheez-Its and temporal interplanetary communication junctions look identical?

Rev. Rowan Redbeard wrote:Wait a minute...my textbook says that it's Wheat Thins.

EarthRise wrote:Are you sure that your copy wasn't provided to you by an artificial wormhole passed through a stable natural wormhole? It might have come from an alternate universe.

Rev. Rowan Redbeard wrote:I think it was the result of a dimensional polarity shift within a multiuniversal singularity which caused a stitching together of my original universe with yours.

EarthRise wrote:So you are suggesting that our temporal interplanatary communication junctions are now similar in appearance to both Wheat Thins and Cheez-its?

Jesus H. Christ, how many TICJs have I eaten?

Rev. Rowan Redbeard wrote:No, I'm suggesting that your temporal interplanatary communication junctions are similar in appearance to Cheez-its and my temporal interplanatary communication junctions are similar in appearance to Wheat Thins. Our temporal interplanatary communication junctions are similar in appearance to generic brands of Triscuits.

EarthRise wrote:I was under the impression that only one pseudogravitational rift had brought into existence the temporal interplanatary communication junctions. Now there must be many rifts to create so many forms! I must study this more.

Rev. Rowan Redbeard wrote:There was only one. Per universe. However, since the temporal interuniversal communication junctions of some universes share the same form as the temporal interplanetary communication junctions of other universes, those universes can temporally communicate with specific planets of other universes. When these communications traversed the rifts from both universes, they created an additional universe that spanned the difference between the two, thus creating a universe with 2 pre-existing temporal interplanetary communication juction types. However, this universe had not yet had its pseudogravitational rift event. When it did, the third temporal interplanetary communication juction type came into being.

EarthRise wrote:Ah, I see. However, what concerns me is that this interuniversal juction-engendered universe would collapse into a system with the two opposing universes, effectively blending the multiverse into a single span and making the temporal interplanatary communication junctions take on the form of Ritz crackers. Is there some way to ensure that the dimensional skin between the three intertwined universes does not break, or does such a rift effectively coalesce the locations of the opposite universes, removing the coalesced locations from the opposing universes altogether?

Rev. Rowan Redbeard wrote:You are viewing only three universes. You must understand that this process is constantly ongoing. By the time you have finished reading this, another 3,129,679,012,858,884,617,592,957.99 universes will have been created between the universe we inhabit and other universes. Each of those will form universes between each other and pre-existing ones. Eventually so many universes will be formed that the Great Programmer will finally run a virus check to see what is slowing down the system, and will delete them all.
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:15 pm

But my question is do those universes mesh into the same entropic system, or do we assume there are established barriers between the original universes and the bridge universes created?

Because, if the first, we might be looking at an entropic freeze. If the second, does that suggest that the rest of the universe that we view (yours and mine) is actually an image of our previous respective universes, and that our universe (the one being shared) is self-contained within a few light-years?
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:22 pm

The original EarthRise's universe still exists. As does the original Rowan Redbeard's. But we came into being along with the rest of this composite universe. Each universe is wholly contained, in and of itself. The bridge universes do not span the distance between the two universes, but rather the difference between the two universes, creating a new and complete universe out of those differences.

But there is no entropic freeze. As each new universe is created it creates a universe that spans the differences between it and any other universe that it shares similarities with. As each is created, more possibilities come into being. With more possibilities, there are more ways for universes to share similarities. Which means more universes. Which means more possibilities.
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:33 pm

Now I understand your conclusions. You speak of fifth-dimensional fractals, whereby every alternative of every action branches uniquely to form a universe wholly different from a decision unmade.

This suggests, then, that the temporal interplanatary communication junctions were one of two items: a reflection of the status of a new cosmos (i.e., they change to reflect a variable probability branch), or a conglomeration of all possibile junction morphologies, which are reduced with the branch of each new universe.

The first conclusion therefore states that either cracker varieties are being created at the rate of 3,129,679,012,858,884,617,592,957.99 per sentence read, by every species in existence in the universe. The second implies that all possible junction morphologies will eventually be terminally defined, at which point the universe can no longer branch according to probability. This would be a fine point for a multiverse termination by the work of the FSM.
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:41 pm

That's not what I am saying at all. That would be a single universe branching with each branch branching. Compare it to budding as a means of propegation.

I'm speaking of two universes sharing a similarity (same type of temporal communication junction, but one is for planets--universe 1--and one is for universes--universe 2). Because of the similarity, communications are attempted. Because of the differences, communication cannot take place. So a third universe creates itself out of the similarities and differences of the other two, not in an attempt to translate, but in an attempt to make a coherent whole out of the incoherencies. (somewhat akin to a condom breaking due to being scratched by the crumbs of crackers eaten in bed)
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:23 pm

Why would a multiverse seek to meld inconsistent but ultimately similar objects, though? What purpose would that serve?
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:24 pm

Survival of the species.
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:57 pm

A Darwinian cosmic lineage? What is the point if alternate universes are created between objects at the same point in time as the former universes? Each universe will occur simultaneously at a point of entropy, which will only increase; no new universe will have a net 0 entropy at the time of its creation.

This would be akin to me trying to birth a fellow of my own age: there is a point at which propagation becomes useless.
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:16 pm

That is true only from our single universe viewpoint. We are limited by our understanding. For all we know, two newer universes may bring about an even younger universe, while two older universes may bring about a universe that is well into heat death. And a mix of older and younger may bring about something very odd, perhaps a universe with missing matter...
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:18 pm

Now I'm rather confused.

Therefore, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go create a beverage of liquid euphoria, which, curiously enough, resembles lemonade in this cosmos.
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:25 pm

Why do they call it "lemonade"?

Where did the -ade ending come from?
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:22 pm

Universal probability somehow made it that derivative drinks, like lemonade and whatnot, on many planets end in -ade. There's a legume homologue in the Andromeda, for example, that produces a juice drink ending in the actual sound '-ade,' despite the local language spelling it with twenty phonetic equivalents.
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:30 pm

This would be a derivative of the Gin and Tonic phenomenon?

Douglas Adams wrote:It is a curious fact, and one to which no one knows quite how much importance to attach, that something like 85% of all known worlds in the Galaxy, be they primitive or highly advanced, have invented a drink called jynnan tonnyx, or gee-N’N-T’N-ix, or jinond-o-nicks, or any one of a thousand or more variations on the same phonetic theme. The drinks themselves are not the same, and vary between the Sivolvian “chinanto/mnigsâ€￾ which is ordinary water server at slightly above room temperature, and the Gagrakackan “tzjin-anthony-ksâ€￾ which kills cows at a hundred paces; and in fact the one common factor between all of them, beyond the fact that the names sound the same, is that they were all invented and named before the worlds concerned made contact with any other worlds.

What can be made of this fact? It exists in total isolation. As far as any theory of structural linguistics is concerned it is right off the graph, and yet it persists. Old structural linguists get very angry when young structural linguists go on about it. Young structural linguists get deeply excited about it and stay up late at night convinced that they are very close to something of profound importance, and end up becoming old structural linguists before their time, getting very angry with the young ones. Structural linguistics is a bitterly divided and unhappy discipline, and a large number of its practitioners spend too many nights drowning their problems in Ouisghian Zodahs.
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Postby EarthRise on Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:33 pm

Precisely!

Only, Douglas Adams was less than familiar with the -ade tendency in the universe.
[...] the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
-Darwin
User avatar
EarthRise
Hox God
 
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: who wants to know?

Postby Rev. Rowan Redbeard on Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:37 pm

So you are promoting universal ade to those in need?
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate

By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant.
User avatar
Rev. Rowan Redbeard
Prophet of Pastafarianism
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:49 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Next

Return to Games, Fun, and Jokes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests