You do like to avoid answering anything don't you TT is there some fear you have?

Not an issue to me as always I will answer any questions, so I guess I will answer my own.

Originally Posted By: Orac
1.) So if reality is a story what does it mean to be alive?

To me I take a very different definition to what many in biological sciences would take that is the ability to excercise choice or free will so I exclude many simple thing that biology would consider alive. Someone like Bill G would see this as heresy because that isn't what standard science says. My response is we know classical physics is wrong so why do we cling to these classical science notions of what life is, no science is damaged by simply refining.

When we look at say NASA and how it tries to define life
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxies/life's_working_definition.html

We get a messy definition where you are trying to split hairs over crystals, virus, proteins, RNA etc.

To me none of that is important the question to me is can the item to be classified make a choice which it self controls.

Originally Posted By: Orac
2.) Who defines the state of being alive GOD or a process?

Defined as I do above the process of choice defines alive and the question of GOD existing or not is mute.

Originally Posted By: Orac
3.) Is the reality defined for you or does GOD or something/someone make the reality?

Making choices defines reality which is in exact alignment with what QM as a science says and belief in GOD is one of those choices.

Originally Posted By: Orac
4.) What is the purpose of the reality and it's cosplay.

Probably the most difficult question but I pretty much reject all the standard religion answers like good vs evil as trash. I can't see the logic of how torturing people thru some sort of trial somehow selects the good ones and it doesn't fit with a god who knows all and is merciful. I think the Romans tried all that stuff in there colosseum and we view them as barbaric.

So if I exclude GOD as a choice I must look to the more mundane science answers. The most likely driver will be the usual suspect "Energy" and it's partner in crime will be QM. The difficult part taking this approach is ultimately deciding if we simply have an initiated start point and then choice and chance takes over or does the drive persist. To me it is entirely possible and likely it is a mixture of the two. Again it's not a very standard biological science version but nor is it in direct conflict with the standard ideas.

Originally Posted By: TT
I'm not a mathematician but, the idea of infinity should be considered prior to the question. I would see it as a an abstract potential, without boundaries..
Unless you decide it isn't, once you've put your own ideas in place another would actually have to meet you where you are at, to answer the question to your satisfaction.

That is actually the point of asking the question because it forces the issue on what definition.

Originally Posted By: TT
I realize this wouldn't probably float a mathematicians boat. When adding numbers and determining value by amount it probably won't work. whistle Ah well....

To me it's all perfectly reasonable and it wouldn't be a problem with true mathematician because you got actually very very close to a complete answer ... Bill G would probably have kittens along with some school grade maths teachers. I think it is funny you thought it might be judged wrong. It all works correctly in all situations by the way.

You actually got the point the numbers 1 & 2 are different yes and you realized that "greater than" requires a number of subjective decisions not least on direction.

In maths/physics terms like "greater than" is called a "relational operator".

You sort of half got that the other part of the problem with relational operators don't necessarily work with all numbers which includes infinity because they are subjective constructions.

Most average people get the question as a focus on the problem with defining infinity. The really switched on ones and what you did was realize it actually brings into focus what does bigger/smaller/greater/lesser actually mean and that the problem may not actually be the infinity.

Most finally get the problem if I turn the problem to a race or a list and they find they have to put 1 as bigger/better/greater than 2 smile

You certainly did a lot better than most do with the question and that sets you as a constructive thinker and short of giving the "standard term names" you thought your way thru it really well by not assuming anything.

Given your thought processes I will give you a bonus question which you may be able to work thru.

Bonus Question: Identify reasons a relational operator might not work with specific number choices.
Start point hint: Mathematical operators +,-,*,/ result in different sorts of answers than relational operators. Extend the thought to input and outputs.

Where were you when I was trying to do complex number counting with Bill G you would have got it in seconds smile

Last edited by Orac; 07/07/15 09:04 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.