é a natureza cultural da guerra
EM SIMPLEX ENTRE POVOS COM CULTURAS PARANÓIDES COMO OS DOBU
DA NOVA GUINÉ OU OS EUROPEUS E SUAS COLÓNIAS GREGAS OU GERMANAS AS
SOCIEDADES ORGANIZAM-SE E ASSEGURAM MEIOS DE MATANÇA MÚTUA E DE REDES DE
INFORMAÇÃO PARA MAXIMIZAREM ESSA MATANÇA POIS O INIMIGO DE HOJE PODE
SER O ALIADO DE AMANHÃ E VICE-VERSA ...A CULTURA OCIDENTAL EM GERAL TEM
UMA FAMILIARIDADE COM A GUERRA COMO NENHUMA OUTRA E NECESSITA DA GUERRA
PARA A SUA DEPAUPERADA ECONOMIA DESDE HÁ MAIS DE 3000 ANOS, ANOS GREGOS
OU ACADIANOS TANTO FAZ ...PARA POVOS COMO ESTES É INCOMPREENSÍVEL UM
ESTADO DE PAZ ...HÁ PERÍODOS DE FALSA PAZ ...DE GUERRA FRIA OU DE GUERRA
MORNA AO ESTILO CABO-VERDIANUS ADMITIR QUE AS TRIBOS INIMIGAS QUE SE
CONSIDERAM AS TRIBOS ELEITAS POR DEUS SÃO HUMANAS E QUE OS CRENTES NO
DÓLAR SÃO INUMANOS É UM CONCEITO MUITO TOLO ...O VERDADEIRO CRENTE DEVE
ESPIAR O PROFANO E CUIDAR A LOJA ONDE SE ALOJA DA CURIOSIDADE DESSES
PERIGOSOS INFIÉIS ...
POIS POR DEFINIÇÃO OS UBERMENSCH SÃO AMERICANOS E IN GOD THEY TRUST THE TRUSTS ...
POIS POR DEFINIÇÃO OS UBERMENSCH SÃO AMERICANOS E IN GOD THEY TRUST THE TRUSTS ...


In the arts and humanities, data laziness is still very common, because any attempt to quantify these outputs is considered gauche, insensitive, or ham-fisted (adjectives often found in the first few paragraphs of lit theory papers).
Spiner reprised his role of Data in the Star Trek: Enterprise series finale ... from B4 into a new body which contained the memory engrams of Data's creator
mountain's less pressure of o2
no the pattern's don't exist
this is a chaotic universe
data big or small is observator dependent
observation of data is dependent of quantum physics
ALL SYSTEMS ARE QUANTUM SYSTEMS
associal or social ones too...
Information and correlation[edit]
It is generally well established that any quantum mechanical measurement can be reduced to a set of yes/no questions or bits that are either 1 or 0.[citation needed] RQM makes use of this fact to formulate the state of a quantum system (relative to a given observer!) in terms of the physical notion of information developed by Claude Shannon. Any yes/no question can be described as a single bit of information. This should not be confused with the idea of a qubit from quantum information theory, because a qubit can be in a superposition of values, whilst the "questions" of RQM are ordinary binary variables.
Any quantum measurement is fundamentally a physical interaction between the system being measured and some form of measuring apparatus. By extension, any physical interaction may be seen to be a form of quantum measurement, as all systems are seen as quantum systems in RQM. A physical interaction is seen as establishing a correlation between the system and the observer, and this correlation is what is described and predicted by the quantum formalism.
But, Rovelli points out, this form of correlation is precisely the same as the definition of information in Shannon's theory. Specifically, an observer O observing a system S will, after measurement, have some degrees of freedom correlated with those of S. The amount of this correlation is given by log2k bits, where k is the number of possible values which this correlation may take — the number of "options" there are.
All systems are quantum systems[edit]
All physical interactions are, at bottom, quantum interactions, and must ultimately be governed by the same rules. Thus, an interaction between two particles does not, in RQM, differ fundamentally from an interaction between a particle and some "apparatus". There is no true wave collapse, in the sense in which it occurs in the Copenhagen interpretation.
Because "state" is expressed in RQM as the correlation between two systems, there can be no meaning to "self-measurement". If observer O measures system S, S's "state" is represented as a correlation between O and S. O itself cannot say anything with respect to its own "state", because its own "state" is defined only relative to another observer, O'. If the S+O compound system does not interact with any other systems, then it will possess a clearly defined state relative to O'. However, because O's measurement of S breaks its unitary evolution with respect to O, O will not be able to give a full description of the S+O system (since it can only speak of the correlation between S and itself, not its own behaviour). A complete description of the (S+O)+O' system can only be given by a further, external observer, and so forth.
Taking the model system discussed above, if O' has full information on the S+O system, it will know the Hamiltonians of both S and O, including the interaction Hamiltonian. Thus, the system will evolve entirely unitarily (without any form of collapse) relative to O', if O measures S. The only reason that O will perceive a "collapse" is because O has incomplete information on the system (specifically, O does not know its own Hamiltonian, and the interaction Hamiltonian for the measurement).