Amaranth Natural Selection

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1425690078393.png (52.82 KB, 188x270, 94:135, quirell.png)

Amaranth Natural Selection Anonymous 03/07/15 (Sat) 01:01:18 No.5817

So I was bored today and I decided to read up on amaranth.
And one thing that popped into my mind while reading one post on it.
It mention that in some amaranths the rules of the Godhead would prevent further amaranths, making it a kind of dead-end amaranth.

I immediately thought of Lee Smolin's crazy Black Hole theory.

So could the same reasoning work on amaranths?
Like, Basically I'm asking if you'd be more likely to exist in a world where it's possible to amaranth than one where it isn't, because there would be more of the former than the latter.
So would all universes naturally converge to one where the amount of people amaranthing is maximized?

Anonymous 03/07/15 (Sat) 21:03:02 No.5827

When it comes to things like this, I say it's possible as long as you want it to be.
People seem to deviate quite far from the source material when it comes to the OOG lore.

Anonymous 03/08/15 (Sun) 06:01:33 No.5831

>>5817
>there would be more of the former than the latter
Why would that be?

Anonymous 03/14/15 (Sat) 19:45:17 No.5967

>>5831
Have never heard of NS?
You're more likely to being the child of somene who has children than someone who doesn't, and furthermore you are more likely to be the child of someone with 10 children rather than 2.

I just asking if the same principal applies to dreams.

Anonymous 03/15/15 (Sun) 14:12:46 No.5975

>>5967
Sorry but I don't quite understand

>"…you are more likely to be the child of someone with 10 children rather than 2."

I'm fairly confident there are far more parents with two children than there are parents with 10, to the extent that having 10 children is so rare as to be almost statistically irrelevant.

Unless you're talking about a closed system with two sets of parents, one producing 2 offspring and one producing 10, I just don't get it.

Would you kindly elaborate?

Anonymous 03/27/15 (Fri) 21:54:23 No.6213

>>5975
I assume what he meant to say is that, given one set of parents with two children and one set with 10 children, you are 5 times likelier to be a child of the latter than the child of the former.

Look at it this way: if you grouped together the children of a couple with 10 kids, and five couples who each have two kids, any given kid in the group will have a 1/2 chance of coming from either a 10-kid or a 2-kid household. But as far as individual families go, each kid only has a 1/10 probability of belonging to a 2-child couple, while having a 1/2 probability of coming from the 10-child couple.

The odds of belonging to a 10-child family might be extremely low, but the odds of belonging to it are 5 times those of belonging to any single 2-child family.