Some comments on information theory

[christx11]

I am aware that I said I would make another post this evening, but I am unable to meet that commitment. I am stuck in that old saying "the paralysis of analysis". I know from the first communication effort between us, that the gap in communication, language, consciousness, thinking, is a barrier, and I am trying to decide where I need to go. It may take me a while. I just need to decide if bridging that gap is possible.

I will make another post, but it will take a while and I am unsure of where it will go and if I am just wasting your valuable time.

Even reading this post here that I have made, I have trouble with it, as reading it to myself, it seems as if it is some pity ploy. I just need to think a bit and see if I can come up with some way that leads to a point of confluence between two very different levels/states/imprinted and reinforced brain circuits/consciousness's, where something I express clicks with you. It is my task.

 

[christx11]

"No. I think it represents the Euler Product"

Do you agree with me that for s>1 the Euler product, as defined in Euler Product -- from Wolfram MathWorld is convergent to a finite number, while for s=1, as in your case, it is just a formal expression that diverges to plus infinity?

The point is that we need to be clear about facts. Only after we are completely clear about our 3D reality, only then we can meaningfully attempt to cross the reality boundaries and wander into still unknown dream lands.

So, do you fully agree with my statement that I put in bold above?

I absolutely agree with you. But the problem is that what I want to pursue, has nothing to do with that.

 

[ark]

I absolutely agree with you. But the problem is that what I want to pursue, has nothing to do with that.

Then describe ,as clearly as possible, what is it that you want to do with that. And no, you are not wasting my time at all. I have learned something new from our discussion, and it is important for me to learn new things. I thank you for that. You never know when such a new knowledge will be useful!

 

[ark]

I just need to think a bit and see if I can come up with some way that leads to a point of confluence between two very different levels/states/imprinted and reinforced brain circuits/consciousness's, where something I express clicks with you. It is my task.

That is brainstorming. We throw a lot of ideas, they do not have to be rational. They should be "new". Out of 100 of such ideas, one or two may lead to something useful. Otherwise nothing new can be created. But discarding bad or useless ideas is an important part of such a brainstorming session.

It is allowed to say: "I want to play with a formal expression that does not necessarily have a mathematical sense according to the formalized mathematics". That's fine. Playing sometimes leads to discoveries. But not always. And one should be aware of this fact.

 

[christx11]

That is brainstorming. We throw a lot of ideas, they do not have to be rational. They should be "new". Out of 100 of such ideas, one or two may lead to something useful. Otherwise nothing new can be created. But discarding bad or useless ideas is an important part of such a brainstorming session.

It is allowed to say: "I want to play with a formal expression that does not necessarily have a mathematical sense according to the formalized mathematics". That's fine. Playing sometimes leads to discoveries. But not always. And one should be aware of this fact.

I am still here. Yes I am brainstorming, more about how to start in a better way. I have kind of figured it out. I also want to mention that I have some health issues, good days, bad days, and it just also factors in to my interaction here.

I need to start at the beginning and I will try to keep it brief and concise. But I think I should start with my own experience with the "Cassiopaean Experiment", just brief, my understanding of what is going on. It will provide perhaps a snapshot or insight into my own thinking processes, and what I want to try to demonstrate is directly connected to this "Cassiopaean Experiment". Part of my thought experiment only exists because of some of these concepts presented from my exposure to the "Cassiopaean Experiment" and it would be better to present up front how I interpret not only the "Cassiopaean Experiment", but also a couple of those basic concepts it presents. If there is not some kind of minimal agreement on some of these basic concepts, then I don't think I will be able to demonstrate how they apply in my thought experiment.

So that is where I will start.

That is what I am working on.