Thread:User talk:Tmtoulouse/Bump: You know that obnoxious thing people do on the internet when they've said something and they feel they haven't been paid enough attention? I'm doing that./reply (17)

Uh seems pretty axiomatic to me. Lets set this up using a linear system just for simplicity sake.

Mo = X0+X1+X2

R = O - Mo

We have some model of reality, Mo is the prediction of our observations given the elements of our model (X0...XN). If we then take our observed reality (O) we can calculate the "residuals" left over that are not accounted for by our model. The "complexity" of the model is then defined as the number of elements with in the set. To determine if an extra element is worth adding to the model we need to compare the residuals of those two models.

Mo1 = X0+X1 Mo2 = X0+X1+X2

R1 = O - Mo1 R2 = O - Mo2

In order for us to say that Mo2 is "better" than Mo1 R2 must be significantly less than R1. Now what "significantly" means is something we work out in statistics and doesn't need to be defined here. The reason we do not need to worry about it here is because what you guys are postulating is something like this:

Mo1(there is no god) = X0+X1...XN Mo2(there is a god) = X0+X1....XN+1

R1= O-Mo1 R2= O-Mo2

R1=R2

You have therefor added an element to the model XN+1, but kept the residuals equal. Therefore, an sane system of knowledge would reject Mo2 in favor of Mo1.