Enzymind Labs

RE: 'Internet Black Hole Discovered'

Well, I didn't mean for it to be frustrating, just engaging. But that's a core idea behind fiction science, to blend the two well enough that you really have to examine what and how you believe things.

You appear to believe in a fully objective definition of truth, but you'll see in this truth discussion that not everyone does. You know I'm a big believer in the power of the scientific method, but I take a much broader view of truth. I view truth as the best story that can be made from the evidence. But it's only a story, and that story might change, for me and others. Scientific theories can "start anew", from a new frame of reference too.

I think unverifiable and unknowable are synonymous -- you seem to discount anything that is unverifiable, but embrace things within/without a black hole as unknowable.

The speed of light applies to information theory too. Information can not be transmitted, by any means including photons, at faster than the speed of light. Gravitational black holes are also informational black holes. But informational black holes include other abstract objects, where information is sequestered for non-gravitational reasons. These reasons include technology that can integrate information far faster than humans can imagine interpreting that information. That's the basic premise of the phrase/postulate "technological singularity".

I think you're right that "informational black hole" is a misnomer, but I think that's true for "gravitational black hole" too. 'associative relevance density singularity' just doesn't ring. Is "associative relevance" a metric of information? 'Gravitational density singularity'?