PartSkeptic’s Thread for Predictions and Other Matters of Interest

[abaddon]

Altered Initial condition 1)
The grid consists of a chess board modified by adding a black square to the right of each original black square moving the others to the right. Or any other non-chess-board pattern.

Onto this grid you place a simple ant. This ant follows some very simple rules.

1. Move one square forward.
2. If the square it lands on is black, change it to white and turn to the left.
3. If the square it lands on is white, change it to black and turn to the right.
4. Repeat forever.

What pattern of black and white squares will the ant make, in your opinion?

Altered Initial condition 2)
The grid consists of a regular chess board pattern.

Onto this grid you place a simple ant. This ant follows some very simple rules.

1. Move one square forward.
2. If the square it lands on is black, change it to white and turn to the left.
3. If the square it lands on is white, change it to black and turn to the right.
3a. Every tenth move must be a forward move using the next digit in the number Pi (or "e") for the number of forward steps.
4. Repeat forever.

What pattern of black and white squares will the ant make, in your opinion?

Apparently the exact same pattern?

What pattern would that be? Do you know?

 

[PartSkeptic]

What pattern would that be? Do you know?

Are you serious that the second example will ever make a pattern?

I was being seriously facetious.

Randomness has been introduced fairly frequently into that example.

Are you asking for a description of the pattern or a name? I do not know what sort of answer you want. And why would that "pattern" demonstrate emergence?

 

[p0lka]

Are you serious that the second example will ever make a pattern?

I was being seriously facetious.

Randomness has been introduced fairly frequently into that example.

Are you asking for a description of the pattern or a name? I do not know what sort of answer you want. And why would that "pattern" demonstrate emergence?

I thought the initial conditions referred to the state of the board, ie whether all black, all white or a mixture, that is irrelevant as far as has been found.
What you did was changed the rules the ant follows, by adding 3a.

 

[PartSkeptic]

I remember the sequencing and how it enabled the origin to be determined, but I can find no mention of a lack of resemblance to later strains. Link?

The wiki article says

which suggests the opposite.

It seems that the Spanish Flu was a very virulent H1N1 due to certain gene combinations. Those combinations became extinct for some reason. The Spanish Flu seems to have had “precursors” that were around for decades. It also seems that it mutated 3 times and a;; those mutations died off. It is possible that herd immunity to the basic virus may have caused the virulent strain to become completely extinct.

Just how different does the virus have to be to be considered a variant that did not somehow die out completely? How long is a piece of string?

A 2018/2019 site with really good info.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-1918-virus.html

…For decades, the 1918 virus was lost to history, a relic of a time when the understanding of infectious pathogens and the tools to study them were still in their infancy.

…Phylogenetic analysis, which is used to group influenza viruses in accordance with their evolutionary development and diversity, placed the 1918 virus’ HA within and around the root of the mammalian clade. This means that it likely was an ancestor or closely related to the earliest influenza viruses known to infect mammals.

…Dr. Tumpey’s work to reconstruct the complete 1918 virus began in the summer of 2005. To reduce risk to colleagues and the public, he was required to work on the virus alone and only after hours when fellow colleagues had exited the laboratories for the day and gone home.

…On the day the 1918 virus appeared in his cell-culture, Dr. Tumpey knew history had been made, and in fact, a historic virus had been brought back from extinction. He sent a playful, Neil Armstrong-inspired email later that day to colleagues and collaborators, which simply said “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” Everyone then knew what had been accomplished. Dr. Tumpey had become the first man to reconstruct the complete 1918 virus. Tumpey and colleagues wrote “the constellation of all eight genes together make an exceptionally virulent virus.”14 No other human influenza viruses tested were as exceptionally virulent. In that way, the 1918 virus was special – a uniquely deadly product of nature, evolution and the intermingling of people and animals.

…When pre-pandemic vaccines are made, they are stored in the Strategic National Stockpile, along with facemasks, antiviral drugs and other materials that can be used in case of a pandemic. All of these resources, tools, technologies, programs and activities are excellent tools for pandemic planning, and pandemic planning itself has improved significantly since 1918. In the United States, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) maintains a national Pandemic Influenza Plan, and this plan was updated in 2017.

…If a severe pandemic, such as occurred in 1918 happened today, it would still likely overwhelm health care infrastructure, both in the United States and across the world. Hospitals and doctors’ offices would struggle to meet demand from the number of patients requiring care. Such an event would require significant increases in the manufacture, distribution and supply of medications, products and life-saving medical equipment, such as mechanical ventilators. Businesses and schools would struggle to function, and even basic services like trash pickup and waste removal could be impacted.The best defense against the flu continues to be a flu vaccine, but even today, flu vaccines face a number of challenges. One challenge is that flu vaccines are often moderately effective, even when well matched to circulating viruses.

Other older sites:
1918 Influenza: the Mother of All Pandemics https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3291398/

The Story of Influenza - The Threat of Pandemic Influenza - NCBI Bo... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22148/

 

[Allen773]

What’s going on in this thread?

 

[PartSkeptic]

I thought the initial conditions referred to the state of the board, ie whether all black, all white or a mixture, that is irrelevant as far as has been found.
What you did was changed the rules the ant follows, by adding 3a.

All of this discussion relates to the emergence of intelligence, if I remember correctly. I went back to the Prime Cause.

The Prime Cause would decide what board to use - namely the amount of matter and antimatter would be used and how it would be packed or arranged. It would also decide what the rules would be - namely the Laws of Physics. And it would decide on the physical constants - an incredibly small change in one or more would apparently result in a chaotic universe.

Irrelevant to what? For some reason I feel I am debating while blind folded. There are oblique references that I find confusing.

 

[PartSkeptic]

What’s going on in this thread?

I say that in 2009 God spoke to me and told me that humankind could not control over-population so he would do it with a severe pandemic. He confirmed the message was not just my imagination by having me learn of the Swine Flu pandemic the very next day and sending infected students to two places I was passing through in the next 4 days in New Zealand.

A week later I realized that Swine Flu was not the big one but just confirmation for me. I had to use the intervening years to learn about plagues and pandemics and get information relating to the what and why of the big one. Which has arrived pretty much according to plan, although I had to wait and watch. I also say that cell phone radiation is a factor in making the virus so much worse.

You can choose to think there might be some merit in what I say, or you can scoff. If God did talk to me, then this pandemic will result in massive societal change and a serious downward trend in population. One can prepare emotionally and contribute positively to the changes - or one can bemoan the fate of the world.

I know a number of religious people who feel that change is needed, but it will only occur with massive disaster to force the change.



ETA: And of course we are arguing about whether God exists.

 

[PartSkeptic]

This might be the way to express it. It died out. We do not know why. However, it did mutate to less virulent strains.


https://mbio.asm.org/content/3/5/e00201-12

...The milestone achievement of reconstructing an “extinct” pandemic virus raised a number of questions that had not been asked before. The most fundamental of these was whether it was necessary or wise to recreate by molecular means a naturally extinct virus that represented one of the deadliest infectious agents in human history.

...Although the pandemic influenza viruses of 1957, 1968, and 2009 are all descended, via different pathways, from the 1918 virus, only the 2009 pandemic virus expresses an antigenically similar hemagglutinin (HA) (11).

 

[p0lka]

All of this discussion relates to the emergence of intelligence, if I remember correctly. I went back to the Prime Cause.

The Prime Cause would decide what board to use - namely the amount of matter and antimatter would be used and how it would be packed or arranged. It would also decide what the rules would be - namely the Laws of Physics. And it would decide on the physical constants - an incredibly small change in one or more would apparently result in a chaotic universe.

Irrelevant to what? For some reason I feel I am debating while blind folded. There are oblique references that I find confusing.

Ah sorry for being confusing, my reply was strictly related to what was being considered initial conditions regarding the Langton's ant topic.
The starting position of the board is the initial conditions, which seem to be irrelevant when asking about the end patterns.
You changed the rules of the ant by adding 3a, which isn't the same as changing the initial conditions, so I was just posting to point that out.

 

[Mojo]

The Court of Appeal ruling was accurate but kind to the Judge (Laurenson). This judge retired two weeks after his ruling. Although considered an outstanding judge, his demeanor was that of a person entering dementia. How do you give costs to a lawyer who has stated he is an observer and not a participant?

A year after this case the New Zealand Legal Aid was taken to task for corruption on an extensive scale. The opposing lawyer (Cunningham) was funded by legal aid. His brother worked in Legal Aid. He was told by the Appeal Court to sit down and that they did not want to hear from him.

You can look up what the law reports said. This judgement was not in any of them.


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA228/05
CA229/05
BETWEEN SANDRA JEANETTE HOTHAM
Appellant
AND ANNE CHERYL WEIR
Respondent
Hearing: 21 November 2006
Court: Chambers, Robertson and Ellen France JJ
Counsel: Appellant in Person
B M Cunningham for Respondent
Judgment: 4 December 2006 at 3 pm
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
CA228/05
A Leave to appeal is granted.
B The appeal is allowed.
C The High Court award of costs made on 9 August 2005 in favour of the
respondent is set aside.
D There will be no order as to costs in respect of the High Court or this
court.
CA229/05
E The appeal is dismissed.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA228/05
CA229/05
BETWEEN SANDRA JEANETTE HOTHAM
Appellant
AND ANNE CHERYL WEIR
Respondent
Hearing: 21 November 2006
Court: Chambers, Robertson and Ellen France JJ
Counsel: Appellant in Person
B M Cunningham for Respondent
Judgment: 4 December 2006 at 3 pm
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
CA228/05
A Leave to appeal is granted.
B The appeal is allowed.
C The High Court award of costs made on 9 August 2005 in favour of the
respondent is set aside.
D There will be no order as to costs in respect of the High Court or this
court.
CA229/05
E The appeal is dismissed.

...[23] Mr McCartney’s appearance was something of a surprise, as he had indicated in his pre-hearing memorandum that he would not be appearing at the hearing. He apparently advised the judge that he would not be taking part in the hearing, but said that he would remain as an observer. In these circumstances, the judge’s reference to Mr McCartney’s client’s “[opposing] the present application” is a little perplexing.
...[28] There was no possible justification for a costs order in favour of Mr McCartney’s clients. His clients had not filed a notice of opposition. Nor did Mr McCartney seek to take part in the proceeding before Laurenson J. A week later, in the Family Court, Judge Fleming recorded Mr McCartney’s clients’ stance as follows, at [3]:
If [Mr Gay’s s 49] application is made then both the estate represented by Ms Duffy QC and the other interested [parties] represented by Mr McCartney take the view that it would be appropriate that all the proceedings, including the substantive family protection proceedings, be transferred to the High Court.
[29] We are not, however, concerned with that particular costs order, since, as we have already stated, Mr McCartney’s clients have indicated that they do not intend to enforce it.
...[30] It seems equally clear that Mrs Weir should not get a costs order, given the stance she adopted in her notice of opposition, as set out at [6] above. It appears that at the hearing, Mr Gay’s stance wavered and became akin to opposition, although the passage from His Honour’s judgment we have quoted above at [24] would indicate that Mr Gay was still seeking “to have the matter transferred to [the High] Court”, albeit for a quite different reason from that which was motivating Mrs Hotham.
Later in the month, he advised the Family Court of his “unequivocal instructions” to apply to the High Court under s 49, which led to the transfer of the proceeding to that court, the very course Mrs Hotham and Mrs Weir had sought from the start, for their differing reasons.
[31] In these circumstances, Mrs Weir should not have been regarded as “the winner”. Mrs Hotham did not (immediately) get what she wanted, but nor did Mrs Weir. Had Laurenson J granted Mrs Hotham’s application, it would have been very unfair if Mrs Weir and Mr McCartney’s clients had been required to pay costs to Mrs Hotham, given their non-opposition to what was proposed. The converse must also apply.

That’s clearly not the right case, as it hasn’t been reported. The one you referred to was one that you claimed had been reported with “a one-line report saying that "In an unusual case, the discretion of a judge on costs was overturned””, and which they “had no choice but to report it as it was Court of Appeal ruling.” You further claimed that you had read the report in the New Zealand Law Reports.

Any chance of the citation?

 

[PartSkeptic]

That’s clearly not the right case, as it hasn’t been reported. The one you referred to was one that you claimed had been reported with “a one-line report saying that "In an unusual case, the discretion of a judge on costs was overturned””, and which they “had no choice but to report it as it was Court of Appeal ruling.” You further claimed that you had read the report in the New Zealand Law Reports.

Any chance of the citation?

I stand corrected on where I read the one-line citation. But read it I did. My amazement at a one-line citation was unforgettable. NOW, the cases are mostly online.

It was a Court of Appeal case so look at the listing.

http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZCA/2006/332.html

However, this was not the case I looked at in the Law Library. The NZLR are not the only listing of case law. Obviously I only found the reference in a series of case law where they summarized the cases.

Thanks for pushing me to investigate further. If I went to the Law Library now, I am fairly sure I would be able to find the book I found the one-liner.

ETA. Just thinking. It may be the Law Reports. One needs a paid subscription to Lexis to access them. IIRC they come out once a year and review various topics. I found the reference under "Costs". Maybe the Wits University Law Library has them. I would have to subscribe to the Alumni to get access. Too difficult. Since you are so determined, why do you not pay a lawyer in NZ to look it up for you, and report back.

ETA2 http://www.lexisnexis.co.nz/en-nz/products/new-zealand-law-reports.page

 

[PartSkeptic]

Ah sorry for being confusing, my reply was strictly related to what was being considered initial conditions regarding the Langton's ant topic.
The starting position of the board is the initial conditions, which seem to be irrelevant when asking about the end patterns.
You changed the rules of the ant by adding 3a, which isn't the same as changing the initial conditions, so I was just posting to point that out.

Okay. But with an infinite sized chess board, how many choices of starting position does one have? Black or white. And in one move or two one may get to the alternative starting position, so there is actually no choice of starting position.

The choice of board pattern is an initial condition. It is likely with a simple set of rules that a type of pattern may emerge with different board patterns. And that the pattern is the same for any position start on the board if the first sequences can get it to the square that starts off the pattern.

A pattern "emerges". Why is this significant? One is following an algorithm.

Even if one got a box of air with random molecules, the random motion may just form patterns for a brief instant. One would need an infinite amount of time, but the degrees of freedom are huge.

 

[RedStapler]

I say that in 2009 God spoke to me and told me that humankind could not control over-population so he would do it with a severe pandemic. He confirmed the message was not just my imagination by having me learn of the Swine Flu pandemic the very next day and sending infected students to two places I was passing through in the next 4 days in New Zealand.

A week later I realized that Swine Flu was not the big one but just confirmation for me. I had to use the intervening years to learn about plagues and pandemics and get information relating to the what and why of the big one. Which has arrived pretty much according to plan, although I had to wait and watch. I also say that cell phone radiation is a factor in making the virus so much worse.

You can choose to think there might be some merit in what I say, or you can scoff. If God did talk to me, then this pandemic will result in massive societal change and a serious downward trend in population. One can prepare emotionally and contribute positively to the changes - or one can bemoan the fate of the world.

I know a number of religious people who feel that change is needed, but it will only occur with massive disaster to force the change.



ETA: And of course we are arguing about whether God exists.

2009?

With this massive delay, it's almost like "god" acts like a human (or like a human invented him).

Also, at this rate, humans will simply produce new humans while practically rendering the efforts of "god" meaningless.

 

[Spektator]

What’s going on in this thread?

It's wandering like a doped up ant but never coming close to the topic.

 

[Mojo]

2009?

With this massive delay, it's almost like "god" acts like a human...

Or maybe a committee.

 

[RedStapler]

Or maybe a committee.

The picture of a committee of "gods" having a heated debate on how to decimate those humans is really funny.

 

[PartSkeptic]

2009?

With this massive delay, it's almost like "god" acts like a human (or like a human invented him).

Also, at this rate, humans will simply produce new humans while practically rendering the efforts of "god" meaningless.

I am a fast learner. But Gods lessons take time. I had to experience an event, think about it, and then various books and other articles would coincidentally come along which had relevant enlightening information. Then it was on to the next event. There could be weeks or months between events. The last and most critical lesson was that cell tower emfs cause long term subtle damage - and that it would not be noticed until very late.

Your imaginary (Marvel comics?) Gods apparently do not operate like real Gods. Hence your straw Gods are easy to discredit. You guys elevate the straw-man fallacy to a new level - the straw-God fallacy.

One lesson I have learned is that God is patient. He has been around for a very very long time. You focus on proof (a precise timing) rather than the thrust of the message - which is this one is going to be very bad. How long before hope turns to despair? I estimate (my personal guess) is that it will be five years or less.

Yesterday I was in really good health. Mentally and physically. Clearly there is hope for me. I got my blood pressure down using a bunch of natural techniques. Happily, it includes a small glass of red wine at the start and end of the day.

But this morning I went to the factory - and forgot my emf protection. This afternoon I had a mild headache (one I recognize as a "tower headache"). It is not just a headache. It also made me feel tired and drained. However, I am getting a grip on what is making me ill and also how to beat it. The stay-at-home lock-down did me some good. I learned how different a virus headache is as well.

 

[Pixel42]

Have you done that blind test yet?

 

[p0lka]

Okay. But with an infinite sized chess board, how many choices of starting position does one have? Black or white. And in one move or two one may get to the alternative starting position, so there is actually no choice of starting position.

The choice of board pattern is an initial condition. It is likely with a simple set of rules that a type of pattern may emerge with different board patterns. And that the pattern is the same for any position start on the board if the first sequences can get it to the square that starts off the pattern.
A pattern "emerges". Why is this significant? One is following an algorithm.

Even if one got a box of air with random molecules, the random motion may just form patterns for a brief instant. One would need an infinite amount of time, but the degrees of freedom are huge.

The choice of board pattern is an initial condition and as has been stated previously, it's irrelevant what that initial condition is regarding the pattern that emerges.

 

[RedStapler]

I am a fast learner. But Gods lessons take time. I had to experience an event, think about it, and then various books and other articles would coincidentally come along which had relevant enlightening information. Then it was on to the next event. There could be weeks or months between events. The last and most critical lesson was that cell tower emfs cause long term subtle damage - and that it would not be noticed until very late.

Your imaginary (Marvel comics?) Gods apparently do not operate like real Gods. Hence your straw Gods are easy to discredit. You guys elevate the straw-man fallacy to a new level - the straw-God fallacy.

One lesson I have learned is that God is patient. He has been around for a very very long time. You focus on proof (a precise timing) rather than the thrust of the message - which is this one is going to be very bad. How long before hope turns to despair? I estimate (my personal guess) is that it will be five years or less.

Yesterday I was in really good health. Mentally and physically. Clearly there is hope for me. I got my blood pressure down using a bunch of natural techniques. Happily, it includes a small glass of red wine at the start and end of the day.

But this morning I went to the factory - and forgot my emf protection. This afternoon I had a mild headache (one I recognize as a "tower headache"). It is not just a headache. It also made me feel tired and drained. However, I am getting a grip on what is making me ill and also how to beat it. The stay-at-home lock-down did me some good. I learned how different a virus headache is as well.

And not one word on the fact that since 2009, humans have been constantly outgrowing the sinister efforts of the "Godly committee of reducing human numbers in most ineffective ways".