XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory   
   From: janburse@fastmail.fm   
      
   Hi,   
      
   Maybe the local rules of a turing machine   
   head slow down, because energy density gets   
   less and less. Energy migh even stop:   
      
   "Unique to universes described by the FLRW metric,   
   a de Sitter universe has a Hubble Law that is not   
   only consistent through all space, but also through   
     all time (since the deceleration parameter is q   
   = − 1, thus satisfying the perfect cosmological   
   principle that assumes isotropy and homogeneity   
   throughout space and time.   
      
   There are ways to cast de Sitter space with   
   static coordinates (see de Sitter space), so   
   unlike other FLRW models, de Sitter space can   
   be thought of as a static solution to Einstein's   
   equations even though the geodesics followed by   
   observers necessarily diverge as expected from   
   the expansion of physical spatial dimensions.   
      
   As a model for the universe, de Sitter's solution   
   was not considered viable for the observed universe   
   until models for inflation and dark energy were   
   developed. Before then, it was assumed that the   
   Big Bang implied only an acceptance of the weaker   
   cosmological principle, which holds that isotropy   
   and homogeneity apply spatially but not temporally."   
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Sitter_universe   
      
   Bye   
      
   olcott schrieb:   
   > On 12/2/2025 5:42 PM, Mild Shock wrote:   
   >> Hi,   
   >>   
   >> Pot Head Olcott, what are you smoking?   
   >> BB(5) is only S(5)=47,176,870 steps.   
   >>   
   >   
   > What about BB(googolplex ^ googolplex) ???   
   >   
   >> Why invoke Einstein who believe in a   
   >> 10–100 million light-years wide universe?   
   >>   
   >> Can you explain?   
   >>   
   >   
   > Instead of beliefs (mind closing things)   
   > I have sets of mutually exclusive hypothetical   
   > possibilities. When I can make these categorically   
   > exhaustive then certainly one of them is true.   
   >   
   >> Bye   
   >>   
   >> P.S.: Turing machines that don't terminate   
   >> AND extend the tape indefinitely are of   
   >> course other wordly, relative to Einstein,   
   >> if Einstein would have assumed that the   
   >>   
   >> Universe does not expand. Einstein Universe   
   >> was indeed Static, non-expanding. And   
   >> expanding universe theory was formed after   
   >> Hubble (1929). And a turing machine could   
   >>   
   >> expand in lockstep with an universe, right?   
   >>   
   >> olcott schrieb:   
   >>> On 12/2/2025 5:13 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>> On 12/2/25 3:05 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>> On 12/2/2025 4:44 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>> bruh it's get even weirder when the likes of scott aaronson try to   
   >>>>>> construct weird ass proofs to demonstrate when BB exactly becomes   
   >>>>>> "to complex" and exceeds the bounds of "decidability" ...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> which is just fucking absurd tbh   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Busy beaver quickly consumes more memory than atoms   
   >>>>> in the universe.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *known/observable* universe, not that fundamental math is concerned   
   >>>> with such considerations   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Einstein proposed the possibility of a finite   
   >>> yet unbounded universe. That would entail a   
   >>> finite number of total atoms in the universe   
   >>> and a bunch of empty space.   
   >>>   
   >>> I read his paper before I finished high school.   
   >>> The Busy Beaver cannot possibly make any   
   >>> difference and should be discarded on that basis.   
   >>>   
   >>> On the other hand the nature of truth itself   
   >>> could make a difference whether or not life   
   >>> on Earth continues to survive.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)