I had another thought while scrolling on SH. Again!

[vzymmer]

So... I had another thought while scrolling and reading titles on SH(scribblehub).

The topic this time is Chaos, Order and Paradox Theory.

I always had a fascination on the word chaos. It all started when I watched a jurasic park movie.
The scene where malcom explained the Chaos Theory always stuck to me till this day and age.
How is all this relevant to the topic you ask?
It's simple really, I already knew Chaos Theory but I haven't heard or read of the Order Theory yet.

In the movie, Chaos theory was explained like this "every chance action and event are all unpredictable because of very minute differences, take for example a drop of water and your hand. Dripping water on the exact same spot on different but simillar occations lead to different results."

It was explained that chaos is the unpredictability of the world around us.
Like a thousand sided dice being cast for every action you take.

But then I had a question, what about the opposite theory?

After asking that question to myself, this is the answer I came to.

If Chaos was unpredictability then Order has to be the opposite right?

Where the foundation of chaos is the future, then order lies in the past.

Our every action is dictated by our previous actions, or in laymans term.

It is fate(preordained).

That was the only logical conclusion I came to.

I mean people are creatures of habbit and repetition.

Its like an oldschool RPG game. Your actions are dictated by what you chose.
If you choose a mage you're a damage dealer, if you chose a priest you're a healer.
People don't like unrewarded hard work so they choose what is already known to be successful.

If you feel that there is something missing then you're right.

The third theory is the Paradox Theory.

If you've heard of schrodingers cat theory then you already know a paradox.

A paradox is a state in which two opposing facts exist in the same moment in time.

Take for example schrodingers cat theory, in which the cat is both alive and dead unless proven otherwise when observed.

The Chaos and Order theory both exist if there is a Paradox unless proven otherwise.

Its hard and tiring to put what I know about these theories into words so imma stop now.

There were also things I haven't elaborated like free will, and that theory about being able to predict the future if you have a machine with a high enough proccessing power because you'd need to predict every single movement in the planet. I forgot the name, it starts with L I think? It's on the tip of my tongue but I can't remember.

 

[LoliGent]

Very insightful. And all this just came to you as you were searching for more ecchi stories, huh?

 

[Lord_Drakonus]

NOOOOOO, NOT ANOTHER RABBIT HOLE!!!

I literally just came out of a hacking forum rabbit hole and now the universe decides to suck me into the chaos theory rabbit hole??? I literally spent 6 hours in a hacking forum rabbit hole, and this is what I get just a few minutes after getting out?

Gimme a break please.

 

[Akivien]

But your theory on order and chaos itself is very flawed because it is the same as denying free will of a sentient being, and if everything we did in the past was predetirmend then our present actions and future actions will also be the same.

 

[LordJoyde]

Chaos is movement.
Order is stagnation.

Right up to the point when they aren't and here's where stuff becomes tricky. Chaos, as it is, is defined as the unpredictability, the spice of life, the everlasting push for change, while Order is the 'opposite', the fight for stability, for conservation and consolidation.

Chaos is the rebellion against Order.
Order is the domination of Chaos.

Let's call their neverending struggle a war. Lets say that 'Chaos' wins and all things become 'chaotic', unpredictable, ever-changing and never the same. In this very instance, in that same moment when Chaos becomes the victor, it simultaneously loses and Order is truly victorious, because their positions have switched.

What was once chaotic is now the norm, the stagnation, the unchanging, the same as everything else, perfectly conformed to the common state, thusly Chaos becomes the new Order. In this ever-burning reality of permanent change, a form of Life dominates a small portion of this chaotic place, starting anew the enforcement of Order upon reality.

Same goes when Order wins; for a reality of perfect Order is one where everything that could possibly limit or threaten that order has been removed, when all life is dead, when every star is extinguished and all of creation is made sterile. When all is sterile, Chaos ensures that life is reborn, its infestation and its gift to reality. And as Life prospers, it sees the orderly reality around it as a cancer, as something that should not be, as a form of existence that is antithetical to what they believe 'should be'.

Thusly, the new life begins to enforce its new, chaotic and lively, change upon its own reality, twisting the former Order into the new Chaos and vice versa, causing the cycle to begin anew.

Life is thus, the child of Order and Chaos, as well as the reason why the 'war' will never end.

P.S - I am not responsible for any existencial dread experienced by anyone reading this comment. It was solely your choice to read it through~.

 

[Mechaphobic]

Chaos only exists because we lack the ability to determine all possible variables, yet.


I subscribe to a much different theory, and I feel like everything is just a bigger food chain. Almost as if the universe is designed to produce the strongest, smartest species.


A planet is an incubator, and as long as all of the requirements are met, life will begin to form. This life will compete with each other, and ultimately a winner will be decided. This victor will begin to discover the workings of the world, and have a new fight with the world itself. I think climate change is just the next hurdle our race will have to go through.


I believe that every race will have to learn how to take control of a planet, this is the only way that colonization is possible. Then using everything a species learns from their own planet, they begin doing the same elsewhere. With the eventual goal of overcoming entropy itself, before delving into the 4th dimension and beyond.


Everything we see is just a form of challenges, and all the tools necessary exist to overcome them. Our society is the tale of our race, and our decisions are just filler.

 

[Akivien]

Chaos is movement.
Order is stagnation.

Right up to the point when they aren't and here's where stuff becomes tricky. Chaos, as it is, is defined as the unpredictability, the spice of life, the everlasting push for change, while Order is the 'opposite', the fight for stability, for conservation and consolidation.

Chaos is the rebellion against Order.
Order is the domination of Chaos.

Let's call their neverending struggle a war. Lets say that 'Chaos' wins and all things become 'chaotic', unpredictable, ever-changing and never the same. In this very instance, in that same moment when Chaos becomes the victor, it simultaneously loses and Order is truly victorious, because their positions have switched.

What was once chaotic is now the norm, the stagnation, the unchanging, the same as everything else, perfectly conformed to the common state, thusly Chaos becomes the new Order. In this ever-burning reality of permanent change, a form of Life dominates a small portion of this chaotic place, starting anew the enforcement of Order upon reality.

Same goes when Order wins; for a reality of perfect Order is one where everything that could possibly limit or threaten that order has been removed, when all life is dead, when every star is extinguished and all of creation is made sterile. When all is sterile, Chaos ensures that life is reborn, its infestation and its gift to reality. And as Life prospers, it sees the orderly reality around it as a cancer, as something that should not be, as a form of existence that is antithetical to what they believe 'should be'.

Thusly, the new life begins to enforce its new, chaotic and lively, change upon its own reality, twisting the former Order into the new Chaos and vice versa, causing the cycle to begin anew.

Life is thus, the child of Order and Chaos, as well as the reason why the 'war' will never end.

P.S - I am not responsible for any existencial dread experienced by anyone reading this comment. It was solely your choice to read it through~.

Yes we could classify order as an absolute such as 1 will always equal 1 while chaos represents the limitless posibilities such as 1 can be equal 1 or 2 or 3 etc...
But in this case the difference between both becomes unclear.
Because in chaos' limitless posibilities there will be one where 1=1=absolute order.
And it works the opposite way as well.

 

[Deleted member 45782]

You remind me of someone who likes to speak philosophy...are you the same one?

\0o0/

 

[LordJoyde]

Yes we could classify order as an absolute such as 1 will always equal 1 while chaos represents the limitless posibilities such as 1 can be equal 1 or 2 or 3 etc...
But in this case the difference between both becomes unclear.
Because in chaos' limitless posibilities there will be one where 1=1=absolute order.
And it works the opposite way as well.

Well, to answer that is really easy, but difficult to wrap your head around.

If you've ever heard the expression 'two sides of the same coin', then apply this to Chaos and Order. What most people seem to forget when they say this however, is that even if a coin has two sides, its still the same, one coin.

They aren't different things. There is no Chaos or Order. They can only be differed from one another when we force ourselves to look at them through a point of view.

Looking at things as a whole, they are revealed to be a singular cycle, the same coin mentioned beforehand. Right now though, I do believe we are in a cycle which prefers Order rather than Chaos. Why? Well, because of entropy. All things that exist are inexorably driven to entropy and sterility. Eventually, the universe will experience a heat death, returning everything to an orderly state in contrast to the chaos it is currently in.

Now take into account what is known as the Big Bang. What we know about it is that it was a ball of concentrated energy/matter that exploded so hard, the explosion is literally still happening right now.

What if, the creation of the 'bomb' for the big bang, is the final result of a Chaos/Order victory? After all, in order to keep existing in a reality with ever dwindling resources, Life would need to consolidate those resources as tightly as possible, eventually gathering them all into a single point and consuming them for fuel as Chaos devours everything in sight.

Or all things becoming entropic and the heat death of all reality has already happened. What force remains when all heat dies? Gravity. Gravity inexorably pulls things together, inevitably collapsing matter to the point of it becoming a black hole, but black holes can devour other black holes to become supermassive.

What if the Big Bang was just the previous reality's supermassive black hole that ate everything else, reached capacity and exploded outward? Plus, if the expansion of heat and space is what makes the passage of time overall possible, does that mean that once everything begins to constrict back inwards, will time flow backwards?

If so, hasn't all this happened before? Will it happen again? Time is just an artificial construct, after all~.

 

[happypanda]

Wow... this discussion is reminding me of the time when Assassin's Creed used to be cool.

 

[Akivien]

Well, to answer that is really easy, but difficult to wrap your head around.

If you've ever heard the expression 'two sides of the same coin', then apply this to Chaos and Order. What most people seem to forget when they say this however, is that even if a coin has two sides, its still the same, one coin.

They aren't different things. There is no Chaos or Order. They can only be differed from one another when we force ourselves to look at them through a point of view.

Looking at things as a whole, they are revealed to be a singular cycle, the same coin mentioned beforehand. Right now though, I do believe we are in a cycle which prefers Order rather than Chaos. Why? Well, because of entropy. All things that exist are inexorably driven to entropy and sterility. Eventually, the universe will experience a heat death, returning everything to an orderly state in contrast to the chaos it is currently in.

Now take into account what is known as the Big Bang. What we know about it is that it was a ball of concentrated energy/matter that exploded so hard, the explosion is literally still happening right now.

What if, the creation of the 'bomb' for the big bang, is the final result of a Chaos/Order victory? After all, in order to keep existing in a reality with ever dwindling resources, Life would need to consolidate those resources as tightly as possible, eventually gathering them all into a single point and consuming them for fuel as Chaos devours everything in sight.

Or all things becoming entropic and the heat death of all reality has already happened. What force remains when all heat dies? Gravity. Gravity inexorably pulls things together, inevitably collapsing matter to the point of it becoming a black hole, but black holes can devour other black holes to become supermassive.

What if the Big Bang was just the previous reality's supermassive black hole that ate everything else, reached capacity and exploded outward? Plus, if the expansion of heat and space is what makes the passage of time overall possible, does that mean that once everything begins to constrict back inwards, will time flow backwards?

If so, hasn't all this happened before? Will it happen again? Time is just an artificial construct, after all~.

But you talk about the universe is born from a singularity and so everything is from the same source, in conclusion order and chaos are just the same thing. And we by giving birth to concept create a picture of the way we see the world, that's beautiful.

 

[owotrucked]

Hum... isn't chaos simply defined by the sensitivity of a system to initial conditions?

I believe it works in the framework of deterministic system. In other words, fate is already preordained even in a chaotic system.

If you care about free will, the topic should be addressed in the fundamental physical interaction like quantum mechanics.

---about predictability

I dont think it really define chaotic systems

I think that if you run a perfect mathematical model of a chaotic system, and control the initial condition perfectly it'll give the exact same results every time. So I'd say it's predictable in this regard.

If you dont have analytical solutions you usually just run a numerical approximation and that can bring some randomness to the results.
If you try to look at a real chaotic system running in real time in the physical world, you cant know the exact initial conditions, making it unpredictable.

In the end, I think predictability is a spectrum. You might be able to make prediction on smaller time frames. Take the double pendulum for instance, once it's running and you pause at a moment, look at its positions and velocity it should be enough to make your prediction for the following frames. Just like how weather kinda work?

 

[vzymmer]

Very insightful. And all this just came to you as you were searching for more ecchi stories, huh?

Right you are ma friend

But your theory on order and chaos itself is very flawed because it is the same as denying free will of a sentient being, and if everything we did in the past was predetirmend then our present actions and future actions will also be the same.

But then therein came the third theory which explains our reality in which both the first and second theory exist.

Its all in a matter of perspectives and observation on free will though.

 

[witch_sorrowful]

Okay, I don't know whether you want to dive into the real scientific basis or not, but here it goes -

Chaos Theory says that a system becomes unpredictable beyond a certain level of complexity. The most famous is the "Three-Body Problem", and the "Double Pendulums". Literally everything else also, but these are the smallest demonstrable examples.

Three Body Problem is that three bodies with similar mass will behave in Chaotic manner under the influence of their gravitation., given small random initial velocity. Their orbits simply cannot be determined even with the same initial velocities - this is what is called Chaos.

The double pendulum is also similar. It is a pendulum with a weight at the end attached by a free moving bearing to another pendulum with similar weights. After a certain base initial velocity, the pendulum will begin to move in whatever so the manner - the movement of the two pendulums can no longer be predicted even with the same initial velocity.

Chaos is therefore all about how a complex system cannot be predicted given similar initial conditions.

I think that if you run a perfect mathematical model of a chaotic system, and control the initial condition perfectly it'll give the exact same results every time. So I'd say it's predictable in this regard.

This is not always true. Why? Well... I don't really know the answer, but I know that many systems just simply can't be predicted with accuracy. Something about the errors of calculus add up so fast that system diverges from mathematics that is trying to describe the system.

In case of Quantum Mechanical systems, indeterminacy is part of the whole discipline. Not amount of precision can ever give you a perfect description of the system.

In macroscopic systems away from quantum mechanics, like fluids, (but, is it so? Water is a large of amount molecules interacting with primarily quantum mechanical methods at the base of it. So, ?????). it is still not possible to describe by the sheer amount of largeness involved. Only in some specialized conditions can it be stated with certainty. Like, Laminar Flow. Navier-Stokes Equations work for a large regime, but are difficult to calculate to an exact solution.

In fact, the smoothness of solutions (meaning its continuity) is yet not proven, and remains an open problem in mathematics.


I realize this was a discussion more akin to philosophy, but there are some facts needed to be taken into account in order for better analogies to be drawn. If anyone wants more discussion, feel free to @ me.

TLDR; there is Chaos theory, but literally every other theory is about Order. Indeterminacy is built into these theories. Schrodinger's cat is thought=experiment, not a theory, intended as a paradox to demonstrate the unviability of the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM. There is nothing called Order theory.

 

[LordJoyde]

Okay, I don't know whether you want to dive into the real scientific basis or not, but here it goes -

Chaos Theory says that a system becomes unpredictable beyond a certain level of complexity. The most famous is the "Three-Body Problem", and the "Double Pendulums". Literally everything else also, but these are the smallest demonstrable examples.

Three Body Problem is that three bodies with similar mass will behave in Chaotic manner under the influence of their gravitation., given small random velocity. Their orbits simply cannot be determined even with the same initial velocities - this is what is called Chaos.

The double pendulum is also similar. It is a pendulum with a weight at the end attached by a free moving bearing to another pendulum with similar weights. After a certain base initial velocity, the pendulum will begin to move in whatever so the manner - the movement of the two pendulums can no longer be predicted even with the same initial velocity.

Chaos is therefore all about how a complex system cannot be predicted given similar initial conditions.



This is not always true. Why? Well... I don't really know the answer, but I know that many systems just simply can't be predicted with accuracy. Something about the errors of calculus add up so fast that system diverges from mathematics that is trying to describe the system.

In case of Quantum Mechanical systems, indeterminacy is part of the whole discipline. Not amount of precision can ever give you a perfect description of the system.

In macroscopic systems away from quantum mechanics, like fluids, (but, is it so? Water is a large of amount molecules interacting with primarily quantum mechanical methods at the base of it. So, ?????). it is still not possible to describe by the sheer amount of largeness involved. Only in some specialized conditions can it be stated with certainty. Like, Laminar Flow. Navier-Stokes Equations work for a large regime, but are difficult to calculate to an exact solution.

In fact, the smoothness of solutions (meaning its continuity) is yet not proven, and remains an open problem in mathematics.


I realize this was a discussion more akin to philosophy, but there are some facts needed to be taken into account in order for better analogies to be drawn. If anyone wants more discussion, feel free to @ me.

I'd love to, but that's a lot of words I have no clue what they mean. And I've also always had a deep hatred for mathematics, as its basic premise is to place a value and description onto every single thing in existence as well as those we have yet to discover. It takes away the beauty of the unknown and alien. In a way, math is the ultimate incarnation of the human fear of the unknown, of our innate xenophobia and the majority's inability to place value in something they can't touch, feel, or otherwise measure.

With that said, my opinion is heavily influenced by the fact I despise mathematics on a personal level, though I do see its uses. Math is the very reason why I'm able to express myself like this, after all.

I just wish that it didn't make some people think that just because we don't yet possess the means to detect or describe something, it does not exist, as it cannot be proven to exist. So yeah, philosophy is much more fun.

All in all, I honestly think that 'Chaos Theory' as it is presented, is innately flawed. On the grand scale of things, there is no such thing as an 'incomplex system', just systems whose innate working factors aren't easily deduced, ignored or otherwise unobserved. A theoretical case would be if you told someone to go from point A to point B. They do it and your prediction of them doing so would be 'correct', if you ignore the majority of what you can't see.

My question is, when that person moved from A to B, are they still the same whole that they were on point A before movement? Or should their loss of heat/molecules be counted towards a resounding no? If so, we have no way of knowing for sure which molecules and which pockets of heat would be lost in the process of movement, only becoming clearer if we use math to measure them, but that is a pit that keeps on going deeper, almost as if it expands itself in response to our measurements.

Point being, a system is only ever predictable under a parameter which allows us to apply willful ignorance of the event in its entirety. More than anything else when an observation to a system is applied, it should be noted that 'looking at things outside of the box' will do very little more than simply put you in another, slightly 'larger' box.

 

[owotrucked]

Chaos is therefore all about how a complex system cannot be predicted given similar initial conditions.

There is a separation between the physical real world, and the mathematical model world.

---
In a mathematical standpoint, that statement is wrong. Chaos theory is the study of the range of outcomes that happen when you vary the initial conditions.

In the mathematical world, you define models and control exactly your initial condition. For instance, you can consider x=1 and x won't be 0.99999. Then you can draw your fractals by running iteratively your chaotic function by varying continuously your input.

When you see two double pendulum examples, they have to model an input difference (granted it's tiny).

A step away from the perfect analytical world, is the computation world where you can have truncating errors and all. If the errors are reproductible and controlled, then running a numerical simulation twice should give you the same results. That's because the premise is that the system is deterministic.

Let's say you want to compute the trajectory of the variable u for the chaotic function f with the iteration k and an computation error ε. We note ũ like the true trajectory:
The errors do add up because if your previous iteration u(k)=ũ(k)+ε has a error, your next computed iteration u(k+1) = f(ũ(k)+ε) will be very different from the true result ũ(k+1)=f(ũ(k)). Since you rerun the same function with a completely wrong input, a few iteration later and you'll be completely out of the correct trajectory.

BUT two simulations with same initial u(0) will give you the same two "wrong" trajectory for u(k). When it doesn't, it's because of potato code or uncontrolled errors.

---
In the physical world, yes that statement is correct.

It's fũking unpredictable, because you can't say something like x=1. You can't control or measure perfectly the initial conditions or the velocities.

But it can be enough to make small timeframe prediction depending on how sensitive the system is to the measurement uncertainties.

---
A last argument about predictability in the mathematical world:
If it can't be predicted, it cannot be simulated and cannot be represented. So where do the gif we see come from? Did someone make an animation from a real double pendulum observation?

About fluid mechanics, I don't know what you're trying to say? There are softwares to simulate turbulent flows, just look up on youtube. But I agree that it's impossible to completely predict a turbulent flow in the real world even if you could freeze a frame a measure all velocities of all particles. It would start diverging from the real world after enough time. Incidentally, I believe that's what weather forecast is about.

In conclusion, please keep the notions clear and distinct: a deterministic model will always give the same result for the same initial condition independantly of the computation capabilities. In the real world, initial conditions are disturbed by measurements and computation errors. Chaos theory and Nonlinear physics is the field of discipline motivated by the uncertainties of the real world to apply mathematical models.


---
PS: Yeah I don't like the idea behind your message that a complex system (described by a deterministic model) will magically produce a different output y1 and y2 from a single input x. The premise is using a deterministic function not some sort of mystical functions ffs. It's litteraly just you have x1 and x2 that are very close, it'll produce y1 and y2 very different. The unpredictability part only comes from the input being too uncertain! Don't feed some myths and legend to chaos theory, fuk!

---

All in all, I honestly think that 'Chaos Theory' as it is presented, is innately flawed. On the grand scale of things, there is no such thing as an 'incomplex system', just systems whose innate working factors aren't easily deduced, ignored or otherwise unobserved. A theoretical case would be if you told someone to go from point A to point B. They do it and your prediction of them doing so would be 'correct', if you ignore the majority of what you can't see.

Can you clarify how 'Chaos Theory' is presented for you?

Afaik, chaos theory is just about tracing pretty graphs about the output variables like that:

It doesn't pretend to do anything much except giving a pretext about why your experiments always go wrong.

Tl;dr: You should just use the term of "mainstream media philosophical interpretation of chaos theory seems flawed" instead of saying "chaos theory seems flawed", especially if you're not talking about the truly defined mathematical methods, definitions and techniques developped from it.

It's like you stumble in a room a bunch of modern alchemists talking about gold purity of the soul creating order from chaos...

 

[LordJoyde]

There is a separation between the physical real world, and the mathematical model world.

---
In a mathematical standpoint, that statement is wrong. Chaos theory is the study of the range of outcomes that happen when you vary the initial conditions.

In the mathematical world, you define models and control exactly your initial condition. For instance, you can consider x=1 and x won't be 0.99999. Then you can draw your fractals by running iteratively your chaotic function by varying continuously your input.

When you see two double pendulum examples, they have to model an input difference (granted it's tiny).

A step away from the perfect analytical world, is the computation world where you can have truncating errors and all. If the errors are reproductible and controlled, then running a numerical simulation twice should give you the same results. That's because the premise is that the system is deterministic.

Let's say you want to compute the trajectory of the variable u for the chaotic function f with the iteration k and an computation error ε. We note ũ like the true trajectory:
The errors do add up because if your previous iteration u(k)=ũ(k)+ε has a error, your next computed iteration u(k+1) = f(ũ(k)+ε) will be very different from the true result ũ(k+1)=f(ũ(k)). Since you rerun the same function with a completely wrong input, a few iteration later and you'll be completely out of the correct trajectory.

BUT two simulations with same initial u(0) will give you the same two "wrong" trajectory for u(k). When it doesn't, it's because of potato code or uncontrolled errors.

---
In the physical world, yes that statement is correct.

It's fũking unpredictable, because you can't say something like x=1. You can't control or measure perfectly the initial conditions or the velocities.

But it can be enough to make small timeframe prediction depending on how sensitive the system is to the measurement uncertainties.

---
A last argument about predictability in the mathematical world:
If it can't be predicted, it cannot be simulated and cannot be represented. So where do the gif we see come from? Did someone make an animation from a real double pendulum observation?

About fluid mechanics, I don't know what you're trying to say? There are softwares to simulate turbulent flows, just look up on youtube. But I agree that it's impossible to completely predict a turbulent flow in the real world even if you could freeze a frame a measure all velocities of all particles. It would start diverging from the real world after enough time. Incidentally, I believe that's what weather forecast is about.

In conclusion, please keep the notions clear and distinct: a deterministic model will always give the same result for the same initial condition independantly of the computation capabilities. In the real world, initial conditions are disturbed by measurements and computation errors. Chaos theory and Nonlinear physics is the field of discipline motivated by the uncertainties of the real world to apply mathematical models.


---
PS: Yeah I don't like the idea behind your message that a complex system (described by a deterministic model) will magically produce a different output y1 and y2 from a single input x. The premise is using a deterministic function not some sort of mystical functions ffs. It's litteraly just you have x1 and x2 that are very close, it'll produce y1 and y2 very different. The unpredictability part only comes from the input being too uncertain! Don't feed some myths and legend to chaos theory, fuk!

---



Can you clarify how 'Chaos Theory' is presented for you?

Afaik, chaos theory is just about tracing pretty graphs about the output variables like that:
View attachment 7926

It doesn't pretend to do anything much except giving a pretext about why your experiments always go wrong.

I think I'm just going to concede to your expertise on this and say that I talked out of my ass.

You brought a graph to this and that's just waaay too much math for me to continue thinking straight. What I was referring to when I said 'as it was presented' is just part of the comment I replied to. This specifically: Chaos is therefore all about how a complex system cannot be predicted given similar initial conditions.

Its also that which I disagreed with, saying how there isn't any such thing as a simple system, only a focused and thusly willfully ignorant, point of view. Its all just philosophy and imagination, nothing scientific about it.

 

[owotrucked]

Ah okay~ It was my misunderstanding then. You're right, I don't agree to that representation of chaos me too.

Yeah, it's fine talking about philosophy and imagination. I just felt like toning down the spiritual, legend and myth part. They are fine, but they are only interpretation but still should look at the source material a bit carefully

 

[LordJoyde]

Ah okay~ It was my misunderstanding then. You're right, I don't agree to that either.

Yeah, it's fine talking about philosophy and imagination. I just felt like toning down the spiritual, legend and myth part. They are fine, but they are only interpretation but still should look at the source material a bit carefully

Ehhh, but I'm an author!

Imagination, fantasy, legend, myth! These are my tools of the trade! They, as well as overly-dramatic writing, are my everything~!

Also wow, that is an incredibly jaded and grounded view.

 

[owotrucked]

Ehhh, but I'm an author!

Imagination, fantasy, legend, myth! These are my tools of the trade! They, as well as overly-dramatic writing, are my everything~!

Also wow, that is an incredibly jaded and grounded view.

Sorry I edited my message to be clearer. Well, I'm a simple system, if I see boobs => I like :P.

Yeaaaah of course, imagination fantasy and legend are cool!! I have nothing against them! Continue to dream and take inspiration from science and art, but only when it's fully extracted from reality.

Just don't become an alchemist who project back their inner fantasy onto the real world, claiming their own delusions as reality.

The best is fully accepting fantasy as subjective to feed it into the fictions you create with hints of archetypal truths.