XPost: sci.physics.relativity, comp.lang.prolog   
   From: janburse@fastmail.fm   
      
   Hi,   
      
   "The main application of de Sitter space is   
   its use in general relativity, where it serves   
     as one of the simplest mathematical models   
   of the universe consistent with the observed   
   accelerating expansion of the universe."   
      
   And Spock aka Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn though   
   turing machines and busy beavers don't lead   
   to interesting questions in in sci.physics.relativity.   
      
   Bye   
      
   Mild Shock schrieb:   
    > 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.   
    >>>>   
    >>>   
    >>   
    >>   
    >   
      
      
      
   Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb:   
   > Mild Shock wrote:   
   > ^^^^^^^^^^   
   > Your real name should be there.   
   >   
   >> [...]   
   >> We prove that S(5) = 47, 176, 870 using the Coq proof   
   >> assistant. The Busy Beaver value S(n) is the maximum   
   >> number of steps that an n-state 2-symbol Turing machine   
   >> can perform from the all-zero tape before halting, [..]   
   >   
   > What is the relation of this to physics in general, and the theories of   
   > relativity in particular?   
   >   
   > If there is no relation, it does not belong there.  Please do not crosspost   
   > mindlessly.   
   >   
   > F'up2 sci.physics.relativity so that the possible reason lands in the right   
   > place.   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)