So the announcement for this blog on the main floating adventure site went off okay, I think. One thing I didn't like about it is that I wanted to mention the fact that, even if we have an infinite progression of meta-blog, meta-meta-blog, and so on, we may still need a meta^omega-blog to apologize for failures in that infinite progression.
And this would have to continue indefinitely, with a blog for each ordinal.
Of course, any addressing scheme we develop can only distinguish between countably many blogs, so there is a kind of limit there. This is a limit of modern computing but may be a limit of the universe as a whole. My guess is that the information content of the universe is at most countable. If it were uncountable, I would suppose that every particle has an uncountable amount of information associated with it, which seems unlikely.
No doubt someone better versed in quantum and later physics could tell me if any theory admits the possibility of uncountable information.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm sorry that I didn't post a comment on your main blog, but I couldn't think of anything good to say. So I wanted to apologize here, rather than plug up the comments section of your main blog.
ReplyDeleteI'll try to post an apology when appropriate here, but if not I may need you to create a meta-meta or even a meta^omega blog. Please read "omega" as "oh-migaah" which is how Professor K. (can't remember the name) used to pronounce it. I think you would have known him at some point. He taught me everything I know about transfinite induction, and also how to count... somewhat.
I suppose that the definition of uncountable might have something to do with who's defining it. For example, uncountable to Stephan Hawkings might be defined as infinity, whereas uncountable for me might be anything greater than 3. I loose interest quickly. Should I bookmark this blog and the first excuses blog? I don't know. Ah well, two more blog to usefully utilize when I'm in need of procrastinating.
ReplyDeleteBut, did you consider this argument: http://excuses2.blogspot.com/2009/02/oops.html
ReplyDelete