someone on NPR talking about some fucking hippie who is working on unifying quantum mechanics and relativity on his own. After dropping out of college because they "wanted him to take classes like pre-calculus". And he "tests his theories" by making giant smoke rings in the back of his trailer park.
Quantum smoke rings.
Also, Sarksus the night is still young.
And I have a lab report to do.
It really, really pisses me off when people confuse the simplified analogies used to convey the general idea of scientific theory (which are useful, and nothing wrong with them) with the theory itself.
EG: people forget that the "picture" they have in their heads is at best an imperfect generalization of the actual math. And that without the actual math they can't actually contribute to the discourse of science.
It's not impossible that a philosopher/thinker could produce an analogy or idea that could lead someone else to discover the mathematical reality that proves it. It's just exceedingly unlikely. And high-end physics is probably the very, very last place we will ever see that happen.
I'm really quite optimistic about the survival chances of the human race for at least millenia. Society as we know it as another thing, and much more vulnerable, but really the amount of knowledge we've amassed has pretty much already reached the point that it's fairly trivial to feed, keep healthy and protect from the elements a significant population indefinitely. Even in fairly hostile conditions. The worst scenarios out there could be pretty devastating, but I have a really hard time thinking of something that would happen so fast, so deadly and so final that it'd wipe us out.
Most of the biodiversity out there is another story though. That's going to diminish pretty fast in the 21st century. We're going to recieve a lot of hate from future generations about that.
Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
0
Options
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
There will actually be some dubstep on there, but it's more known as UK bass nowadays. Both James Blake's eponymous LP and Joy O's Sicko Cell / Knock Knock release.
Other than that, it will probably have M83, Cut Copy, Todd Terje, Skudge, Tommy Four Seven, Super Flu, and Marcel Dettmann.
someone on NPR talking about some fucking hippie who is working on unifying quantum mechanics and relativity on his own. After dropping out of college because they "wanted him to take classes like pre-calculus". And he "tests his theories" by making giant smoke rings in the back of his trailer park.
Quantum smoke rings.
Also, Sarksus the night is still young.
And I have a lab report to do.
It really, really pisses me off when people confuse the simplified analogies used to convey the general idea of scientific theory (which are useful, and nothing wrong with them) with the theory itself.
EG: people forget that the "picture" they have in their heads is at best an imperfect generalization of the actual math. And that without the actual math they can't actually contribute to the discourse of science.
It's not impossible that a philosopher/thinker could produce an analogy or idea that could lead someone else to discover the mathematical reality that proves it. It's just exceedingly unlikely. And high-end physics is probably the very, very last place we will ever see that happen.
Indeed.
Something that was pointed out to me (can't recall where) was just how bad humans are at "visually" thinking (visual imagination etc...) in anything except 3 dimensions. In fact I very strongly think it is impossible and anyone who claims to be able to actually visualize in anything but 3 dimensions is self-deluded.
When I first heard this I immediately thought "but wait, I've read Flatland. I can visualize a 2D space....". But that's not really the case. I can visualize a 2D space embedded inside a three dimensional one. The entire vision system of the human brain is very hard-wired to work with objects embedded in 3d space. No more, no less.
Human senses, and the brain that has evolved with them, are utterly incapable of sensing or directly thinking about the kinds of things science has been concerned with for the last hundred years or more. Out intuition and "common sense" in these areas is completely unreliable.
I'm really quite optimistic about the survival chances of the human race for at least millenia. Society as we know it as another thing, and much more vulnerable, but really the amount of knowledge we've amassed has pretty much already reached the point that it's fairly trivial to feed, keep healthy and protect from the elements a significant population indefinitely. Even in fairly hostile conditions. The worst scenarios out there could be pretty devastating, but I have a really hard time thinking of something that would happen so fast, so deadly and so final that it'd wipe us out.
Most of the biodiversity out there is another story though. That's going to diminish pretty fast in the 21st century. We're going to recieve a lot of hate from future generations about that.
I mean, I imagine it is basically impossible for human beings to go extinct barring a world-destroying phenomena. So long as the global ecosystem can at least just barely limp along I am fairly confident that human beings can as well.
The vast majority of the human race will die off, of course, but I just don't see it being possible that an event that doesn't destroy the rest of life on Earth could prevent humans from having at least some tiny population of individuals somewhere.
someone on NPR talking about some fucking hippie who is working on unifying quantum mechanics and relativity on his own. After dropping out of college because they "wanted him to take classes like pre-calculus". And he "tests his theories" by making giant smoke rings in the back of his trailer park.
Quantum smoke rings.
Also, Sarksus the night is still young.
And I have a lab report to do.
It really, really pisses me off when people confuse the simplified analogies used to convey the general idea of scientific theory (which are useful, and nothing wrong with them) with the theory itself.
EG: people forget that the "picture" they have in their heads is at best an imperfect generalization of the actual math. And that without the actual math they can't actually contribute to the discourse of science.
It's not impossible that a philosopher/thinker could produce an analogy or idea that could lead someone else to discover the mathematical reality that proves it. It's just exceedingly unlikely. And high-end physics is probably the very, very last place we will ever see that happen.
Indeed.
Something that was pointed out to me (can't recall where) was just how bad humans are at "visually" thinking (visual imagination etc...) in anything except 3 dimensions. In fact I very strongly think it is impossible and anyone who claims to be able to actually visualize in anything but 3 dimensions is self-deluded.
When I first heard this I immediately thought "but wait, I've read Flatland. I can visualize a 2D space....". But that's not really the case. I can visualize a 2D space embedded inside a three dimensional one. The entire vision system of the human brain is very hard-wired to work with objects embedded in 3d space. No more, no less.
Human senses, and the brain that has evolved with them, are utterly incapable of sensing or directly thinking about the kinds of things science has been concerned with for the last hundred years or more. Out intuition and "common sense" in these areas is completely unreliable.
Yes, our brains are just entirely unequipped to deal with these sorts of things.
I honestly believe that until we begin directly supplementing our brains with technology we will likely hit a brick wall in which we're just unable to comprehend certain facts.
Winky - no need. That's what mathematics has been doing for the last hundred years. Providing a means to deal with concepts our natural brains cannot.
Now I know that elective experimental brain surgery would probably be more popular than "just put in the effort to learn the math" but it is in no way nescessary.
Posts
It's not impossible that a philosopher/thinker could produce an analogy or idea that could lead someone else to discover the mathematical reality that proves it. It's just exceedingly unlikely. And high-end physics is probably the very, very last place we will ever see that happen.
try what i did only 10k up front
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
NBA 2K12
(it's civilization)
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Errybody know that
Most of the biodiversity out there is another story though. That's going to diminish pretty fast in the 21st century. We're going to recieve a lot of hate from future generations about that.
Other than that, it will probably have M83, Cut Copy, Todd Terje, Skudge, Tommy Four Seven, Super Flu, and Marcel Dettmann.
One space for maybe Locussolus or something else.
Indeed.
Something that was pointed out to me (can't recall where) was just how bad humans are at "visually" thinking (visual imagination etc...) in anything except 3 dimensions. In fact I very strongly think it is impossible and anyone who claims to be able to actually visualize in anything but 3 dimensions is self-deluded.
When I first heard this I immediately thought "but wait, I've read Flatland. I can visualize a 2D space....". But that's not really the case. I can visualize a 2D space embedded inside a three dimensional one. The entire vision system of the human brain is very hard-wired to work with objects embedded in 3d space. No more, no less.
Human senses, and the brain that has evolved with them, are utterly incapable of sensing or directly thinking about the kinds of things science has been concerned with for the last hundred years or more. Out intuition and "common sense" in these areas is completely unreliable.
bastion is good with a gamepad
This is bummer-ific.
Oh yeah! I was waiting to get that because I didn't want to use a keyboard!
and she will bawl like a child as usual....wuss
but I van eat apples fine
HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE
It's meant to be!
I'm led to believe my laptop can't handle it, though, and my desktop is in no position for gaming
Eating the apple gives you the fiber to allow you to digest it better?
She actually got that crazy "Fatal Attraction" look in her eyes. You know, when you smile even though you're on the verge of tears?
I mean, I imagine it is basically impossible for human beings to go extinct barring a world-destroying phenomena. So long as the global ecosystem can at least just barely limp along I am fairly confident that human beings can as well.
The vast majority of the human race will die off, of course, but I just don't see it being possible that an event that doesn't destroy the rest of life on Earth could prevent humans from having at least some tiny population of individuals somewhere.
applecadabra
Yeah, developed allergy. Happened to me when I was a kid.
Yes, our brains are just entirely unequipped to deal with these sorts of things.
I honestly believe that until we begin directly supplementing our brains with technology we will likely hit a brick wall in which we're just unable to comprehend certain facts.
Now a k-pop girl is going to sex you and then blow you up with an apple bomb
natch'
I kinda miss it sometimes.
Now I know that elective experimental brain surgery would probably be more popular than "just put in the effort to learn the math" but it is in no way nescessary.