The Fibonacci numbers (as an approximation of recursive Golden Ratio relationships) are actually approximately optimal for growth while minimizing the interference of subunits with each other, as with leaves on a stem catching sunlight. Since that's an emergent property of such optimization tasks, it's not too surprising to find approximations that are easily computable by growth processes. It's not like it's EXACTLY the Golden Ratio, and organisms are investing enormous resources in getting it just right. The deeper question might be "why are physical laws such that mathematical optimizations like that work?"

I'd expect that a large number written in decimal notation would have a 1/9 chance of starting with 1.

Sure, but to what extent can we be confident that the model accurately represents the universe?

Well, there are different kinds of logic. It would be reasonable to apply one to reality that seems to fit.

I was talking about this
http://io9.com/5722187/a-demonstration-of-benfords-law

_________________
A Pimp Named Jeezy Creezy: Lasting all the way up to Valentine's.

And the Pimpeth lord sat amidst his real ballin' players, the Apostles, and raisingeth his cup of Cristal as they devoured the grapes and cheese from the finest bitches in town he said

"Sleepery Dee, Sleepery Doo.
Whoever betrays me tonight, I'll mo'fuckin' cap you!"

The difference is sampling. For a random large number, it would be 1/9, but if the distribution were bottom heavy (there are more cheap things than expensive things, say) then the distribution would be heavy on smaller numbers. Consider a log scale. The part corresponding to numbers beginning with 1 is much larger than the rest, and such a distribution approximates Benford's Law as described in the link.

True True. And I actually do understand what you mean this time since I do have to cover said topics, unlike politics.


Val have you graduated college yet? Masters? Because you're the definition of somebody not using his full capabilities.

_________________
A Pimp Named Jeezy Creezy: Lasting all the way up to Valentine's.

And the Pimpeth lord sat amidst his real ballin' players, the Apostles, and raisingeth his cup of Cristal as they devoured the grapes and cheese from the finest bitches in town he said

"Sleepery Dee, Sleepery Doo.
Whoever betrays me tonight, I'll mo'fuckin' cap you!"

valhallen, there is nothing but the universe that follows the ascribed patterns we experience and communicate, because if we do not experience them, and they cannot be communicated, they do not exist.

and all logics, all sorts of them as you say, have underlying principles that themselves interrelate as the recognition of patterns.




you base that on nothing but the fact that he posts here, which is mostly irrelevant

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

i am v. intested by numanulogy

_________________

I'm NORML and I VOTE
Soul Silver Friend Code: 0260-2900-0828

Topic 12: Contemporary political discourse, 1/19-1/26

I recently ran across this comic, which I think describes politics in the US rather succinctly. What does Spam think? Mostly about the politics, not the comic. But that's fair game too.

yeah at this point i figure it's going to take a few clear evils to make anyone think reasonably again in terms of media-presented rhetoric

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

I'm not smart enough to get it.

I think I get it, but I'm not sure.

_________________
This post is intended for information only. Please do not reply to this message as responses cannot be read or acknowledged due to the stupidity of the user.

Bob the Angry Flower is a very social progressive liberal comic by Steven Notley.

I really enjoyed "Atlas Shrugged 2", myself.

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

Why thank you BR for making me look that up.

_________________
Escape will make me God.

Damn, here I am making fun of political cartoons for being too blatant with their labeling and such, and here I am again, but now I don't get it.

_________________
One time when I was high, I thought I was in an ambulance dying. Turns out I was just eating sherbert.
-stufflikehearts-

well see the idea is that bob the angry flower ironically is the actual one responsible for most things that are in the author's opinion terrible, so the author demonstrates his contempt by having Bob being fervently enthusiastic about these things

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

So, any thoughts on actual political discourse? As in revolutionary rhetoric, the shooting, accusations, counter-accusations, etc.

well, in the vein of bob the angry flower and other politically charged satirists, including colbert and occasionally stewart, it is better to aggressively deride the logical inconsistencies of an opponent than their beliefs (except for the outrageously and obviously taboo, nothing so simple as a cultural or lifestyle based choice, like you know murdering people).

being able to discuss the policy choices as efficient vs the idealogically based screaming with no regards for whether or not something is realistic with resources is the dangerous thing

in clip after clip after clip, arguments are made and ignored by a lot of the media in exchange for yelling and being sensationalist. fox news is not the only network that does it but they do it most obviously and thus they control the speed with which the bar of averages is maintained.

since they readily are willing to plunge into assuming that any opposition to them are literally evil in their eyes, this creates such a bad air for engagement that anyone looking to engage have to reassess how to even begin to do so. :[

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

This coming from a guy who thinks that most Conservatives and rich people are evil?

_________________

i don't think most conservatives are evil

and you and i have different terms for what rich means i think lol :)

there are what? like less than 1000 TRULY rich people in the world, and most of them yeah consistently engage in a lot of terrible things, but it is hard to pin down a lot of them as evil, you know i also believe that too. :)

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

Well, no, first of all there are a lot more than just 1000 "truly" rich people, though it's vague as to what you consider "truly" rich. Consider congress. Each person in congress is making at least $174,000 a year, and that's just a basic salary. This by no means making them rich, but they are quite wealthy; quite a few of those in office own large businesses. Now consider the sheer number of corporations--Microsoft, Intel, AT&T, Domino's Pizza, Dole Foods, Hasbro... the list goes on. And now consider how many executives make up the whole of each of those companies. People making more than $250,000/yr can be considered rich (as per how congress levies taxes), although I think you're defining them as people making more than $1,000,000/yr, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Second of all, you have, on more than one occasion gotten angry at me for using a Conservative stance, and when you have calmed down, explain that it's not me you're getting angry at, but rather the Conservative view itself. You tell me on a regular basis that Conservatives just want the rich to get richer, and then you tell me that rich people are evil. How else am I to interpret your sentiment?

_________________

i had a huge post here about to go, but i deleted it. this is not the place.

suffice it to say you don't argue specifically enough for me to exercise much discipline, and that i've actually gone out of my way to say things that disclaimer my statements as not being actually against the whole of conservatism or rich people.

we even had a huge discussion in which i explained that i worry about the rich because they definitively have the capacity for as great an injury that they create as they create good.

but let me be specific about my definition as a concession for you: I consider one hundred million to a billion a year in either personal income or total assets in control of moving if not able to be personally indulged in... to be RICH.

i am not going to get wrangled into an argument with you about ME, because that's not the thing we're discussing. You can attack ME elsewhere. Right now, I'm explaining how definitively, Fox News and MSNBC and the majority of American Media has been the major attacker of rhetorical civility because they are ready to villify people without talking to them. Let me lay your fears to rest: I will not villify someone OR THE WHOLE OF THEIR IDEOLOGY willing to talk to me (including you, since I like to talk to you), which is what Fox News, MSNBC, etc have the opportunity to do with so many politicians, DIRECTLY TALK TO THEM, and then these media outlets waste these opportunities by villifying them and all they stand for rather than have any real sort of dialogue.

satirists do a better job these days because it seems, to be funny, they HAVE to attack logical consistency in policy moves in order to retain their audience.

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

Wait. No. Hell no. So everything below $100 million is a small business? Everyone between $1,000,000 and $99,999,999 is poor? Where do you draw the line?

Good lord, man! Who's attacking you? I don't go out of my way to insult you in these discussions, and it boggles me as to how you can even think that. If I call you out on what I think is a misinformed idea, why does that automatically make it an insult?

See, I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking the absurdity of your statement. Do you see the difference?


It's hard to take that idea seriously. I can villify someone without ever speaking to them because I know them to be sinister or whatever.

Martha Stewart was convicted of insider trading. To use one's knowledge of one's own company to profit off her own stock downfall is nothing short of devious.

George Soros profited about $1 billion (that's $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0, btw) off the downfall of the British Pound in 1992. And this very same man is now targeting America. Jesus fucking Christ.

Mass murderer Jeffery Dhamer. 'Nuff said.

Do you see my point?


*Blink* Fears?
But didn't you just say that they villify people without talking to them? Are they not talking to them to their faces? (lol)

Jokes aside, the fact that one news group (doesn't matter who they are) might villify someone without talking to them doesn't mean they're wrong. Hell, I'll even give that to MSNBC, despite all the ridiculous comments I've heard their commentators make. (I have examples, but they're not relevant. Ask me later.)

Please don't think I'm trying to insult or villify you by rebutting to your claim. I don't know if you think that's what I'm doing, but you shouldn't get so angry when I say things that aren't an outright insult, because that's never how I intend it.

_________________

o_o

okay i will literally ignore everything here except to emphasize my point as it pertains to this discussion: difference between you and the media: you don't have the opportunity to speak to the people in charge of making policy decisions, and they do. that's the line i was drawing.

they have a professional responsibility to not villify people when reporting about them. That is what journalism is supposed to do.

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

Ah, so you were simply referring to journalists, and not people. Got it.

I don't know, though... I watching FoxNews for a few hours on my boat, and though the time difference did not allow me to see Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity, it seemed that those who were on did not simply try to villify the opponent when they had a liberal speaker on... the host gave him more time than the conservative side and stopped one of the others from interrupting him. Are you sure you're watching the right channel?

...lol...

_________________

Funny you mention the downfall of the British Pound Sterling, yet it is one of the more powerful currencies out there right now. How did Soros benefit off that?

_________________
Escape will make me God.

You know, I would love to research that for you, but it would take high-speed internet to do it quickly, which on a ship is more equivalent to 56k.

Why don't you just look up "Black Friday" and go from there?

_________________