4 ms·

YOU WROTE: "When I did my app, I really liked the last question which was to tell about something 'surprising' or 'amusing' that you had discovered. So I asked

by timach 20y ago

YOU WROTE: "When I did my app, I really liked the last question which was to tell about something 'surprising' or 'amusing' that you had discovered. So I asked if they had had many good answers to that one. Paul said that there were some really good ones, but that inexplicably many had left that question blank! Then he chuckled and said "Actually, there was a guy who submitted this wonderful algorithm for wiping his ass."" My co-founder and I answered the question as follows. "timach notes that time is expanding between The Big Bang and The Advent of Human Consciousness. These are the opposite poles of existence. This means that the mathematical model of physical time using the complete ordered field of real numbers is a misleading metaphor. What is great about mathematics is that it is a tinkertoy of metaphor, and thus offers unlimited possibilities for new metaphors. Rigor is the window through which intuition shines. erdos2 discovered an enumeration formula for a class of combinatorial objects (the "almost-injective" functions) with the following decomposition: the formula is a sum of two terms, the first of which has a closed form representation as fixed sum of generalized hypergeometric functions and which is asymptotically significant; the second is provably not representable in closed form (hence there is no closed form enumeration formula for the almost injective functions), and asymptotically negligible. Moreover, the significant term is asymptotically equivalent to a simpler hypergeometric function, from which a limit probability distribution for the almost injective functions can be derived." I wonder if these responses are far less memorable than a high quality ass wiping algorithm.

jey 20y ago
Sorry to threadjack, but what does this mean: "timach notes that time is expanding between The Big Bang and The Advent of Human Consciousness. These are the opposite poles of existence." I don't understand what you're trying to say by "time is expanding". It also seems to me like a rather anthropocentric view of the universe to put human consciousness at one "pole of existence". We've only observed a thin slice of existence thus far. If you could explain this, maybe I'd understand your following assertion that "the mathematical model of physical time using the complete ordered field of real numbers is a misleading metaphor". I don't understand erdos2's discovery either, but I'll chalk that up to my complete ignorance when it comes to math.
- timach 20y ago
  He's my cofounder and I don't understand what he is talking about either. As for what I am saying, the basic point is that only two interesting things have happened. One is The Big Bang, and the other is that we know it. All else is imaginary. The idea that "we've only observed a thin slice of existence" is falling prey to the metaphor to which I am objecting. There is no "existence" to slice up.
  - jey 20y ago
    Sure, that's (arguably) true within our observation. But I don't think you can claim to know what's going on outside the observable universe -- or even in the galaxy next door. Your statement is also not self-consistent because of this... we don't know what all the products resulting from the Big Bang are. Sure, we do know that our consciousness is a part of that. But even if you were to union together the observations and insights of every human consciousness that's ever existed, it's still only observed one thin slice of the products of the Big Bang (well, existence really). Don't fall prey to an anthropocentric view of the universe! And if we are going to rank the "interestingness" of events, I'd put the happy accident that started this evolutionary process that stumbled upon a fitness gradient giving human consciousness as higher than human consciousness itself. After all, at that point it's "just" a matter of using the fitness metric to wander through the state space. Anyway, thanks for the explanation! I'm not going to respond to this thread further since this isn't the proper forum for philosophical flamewars. :)
  - juwo 20y ago
    "He's my cofounder and I don't understand what he is talking about either" That is so funny! When I initially read your post two days ago, I was indignant at PG a la "throwing pearls (you) before swine (YC)". Now I realize - and I dont know if PG would have had this insight - an entrepreneur needs to communicate ideas. I could not even read through your answers, much less understand them!!!
    - erdos2 20y ago
      I still don't know what he was getting at, and neither does he. :)
mattjaynes 20y ago
Yeah, the ass-wiping algorithm might be more memorable because it's simple, concrete, and there is nothing 'abstract' about it. For more on the 'stickiness' of ideas, check out this book: http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/01/the_stickiness_.html http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/01/the_stickiness_.html

by timach 20y ago

jey 20y ago

Sorry to threadjack, but what does this mean: "timach notes that time is expanding between The Big Bang and The Advent of Human Consciousness. These are the opposite poles of existence." I don't understand what you're trying to say by "time is expanding". It also seems to me like a rather anthropocentric view of the universe to put human consciousness at one "pole of existence". We've only observed a thin slice of existence thus far. If you could explain this, maybe I'd understand your following assertion that "the mathematical model of physical time using the complete ordered field of real numbers is a misleading metaphor". I don't understand erdos2's discovery either, but I'll chalk that up to my complete ignorance when it comes to math.

timach 20y ago
He's my cofounder and I don't understand what he is talking about either. As for what I am saying, the basic point is that only two interesting things have happened. One is The Big Bang, and the other is that we know it. All else is imaginary. The idea that "we've only observed a thin slice of existence" is falling prey to the metaphor to which I am objecting. There is no "existence" to slice up.
- jey 20y ago
  Sure, that's (arguably) true within our observation. But I don't think you can claim to know what's going on outside the observable universe -- or even in the galaxy next door. Your statement is also not self-consistent because of this... we don't know what all the products resulting from the Big Bang are. Sure, we do know that our consciousness is a part of that. But even if you were to union together the observations and insights of every human consciousness that's ever existed, it's still only observed one thin slice of the products of the Big Bang (well, existence really). Don't fall prey to an anthropocentric view of the universe! And if we are going to rank the "interestingness" of events, I'd put the happy accident that started this evolutionary process that stumbled upon a fitness gradient giving human consciousness as higher than human consciousness itself. After all, at that point it's "just" a matter of using the fitness metric to wander through the state space. Anyway, thanks for the explanation! I'm not going to respond to this thread further since this isn't the proper forum for philosophical flamewars. :)
- juwo 20y ago
  "He's my cofounder and I don't understand what he is talking about either" That is so funny! When I initially read your post two days ago, I was indignant at PG a la "throwing pearls (you) before swine (YC)". Now I realize - and I dont know if PG would have had this insight - an entrepreneur needs to communicate ideas. I could not even read through your answers, much less understand them!!!
  - erdos2 20y ago
    I still don't know what he was getting at, and neither does he. :)

mattjaynes 20y ago

Yeah, the ass-wiping algorithm might be more memorable because it's simple, concrete, and there is nothing 'abstract' about it. For more on the 'stickiness' of ideas, check out this book: http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/01/the_stickiness_.html http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/01/the_stickiness_.html