Actually, I have never owned a car. As for lots of material possessions, it's mostly books and ordinary household stuff. It's more than I need or want, but in 75 years, one accumulates stuff which is much more a burden than an asset. — Bitter Crank

It was not my intention to insult you! I merely stated that to provoke... And I didnt know you are 75 already. So sorry about that!

I dont ful-heartedly agree though. Something is nagging but Im not sure what. Do you know how many people lived on Earth back then? 10 000 years ago or so?

Great answer by the way!

The key point is that you need a strong case that invaldiates expanding a existing framework to include new knowledge. — CaZaNOx

I read your idea with great interest! Naturally, I dont agree. Partially. I agree that all material aspects of the true stuff (I' ll explain later what I mean by that) can be expressed by a vector space. Different people though see different material stuff (being part of the wider real stuff). The dreamworld is not emergent from matter though. Is emergent from the real stuff, probably making it even more easy to represent both out of one vectorspace cotaining both matter and magical essential content. The real stuf contains both. In our dreamworld only the manifestation of content is present. In the outside physical world only the material manifestation is present. Once upon a time these two were one only. There vector spaces coincided. With physical hidden variables contact with the gods is possible. Only they know the true Nature of that magic content of matter. How to model them by a vector space? I duuno. It would be blasphemy I guess. These are only two of the possible realities. You can see it as one I guess. But I havent discussed the reality and incommensurability of different physical theories. I havent discussed the real dreamtime of Aboriginals (Im not an Abo). And then there is the reality of vectorspaces. All different realities. All truly existent.

The idea that any involvement in wars and crises is a doom attempt and will bring only more chaos and destruction is simply wrong — ssu

Nice answer, to begin with! Thanks! (ooooh, that damned phone! Ten times I dialed fthanks!). Yes you are right that it can bring chaos and war. And there are situations where its better. One has to be careful though not to introduce western democracy too fast. The whole face of the Esrth is virtually filled with that (which started in ancient Greece(. If thiss democracy means equal opportunities to live a full fledged culture than its allright.

We are new creations because we are properties of existence/God. Our essence is God, our being is created. This is what is meant by 'In Him we live and move and have our being'. We inherit our existence from God. God's existence and ours is the same thing. Everything that is shares God's existence. We become created beings. Suppose bronze is existence. Bronze can be formed in the shape of a bird. The bird is created, the bronze is. — EnPassant

We are no properties of existence. We are the stuff we are made of. And they created it.

Bronze is the stuff. It can be in the form of a bird but its non-living stuff. A real bird is made of the same stuff as the bird. But a bird experiences all the (magical, unexplainable) content of matter. The essence. Only god can explain the essence. We merely experience it.

Is there a point to this game or are you just going to indefinitely annoy me? — InPitzotl

Yes. You are wrong. The brain IS an analogue computer.

The Tr-10 analogue "computer". Computes a continous input to give a continuous output. Just like the brain. Without bits and bites. Only with current. Like in the brain. The difference being that the currents in our brain are not pulled through by voltage sources on ends of wires.

they exist in the mind of the individuals, not outside (in the
%physical — Alkis Piskas

Why cant they exist in the outside? Cant mental states and physical states coexist? By mediation maybe of the body? Is there an independent physical pulling through our mental states? If so then say a true material circle form pulls through our mental image of it cant we connect it with other physical circels, or otber forms, to create a new physical reality which wasn't present before our thinking?

What do you mean by the "real thing?" — Alkis Piskas

Good question. Depends on the one who's looking.

A rock exists, a bird has life and being. — EnPassant

A rock has life and being potentially in it. God merely created the stuff from which stones and birds are made. He was outside the world of being and existence. Not a part of it. They created the world in their image. Not their essence. If he did then we would be the same as God. But we are not the same as them. We are no gods.

If existence is not a property of God then how can they be the same?

Im tending to think there is only one reasonable person here... And its not me...

Stop wasting our time. — Daemon

I asked the question! I cant help it that you dont understand my vision on the brain. Man! @Corvus was right! What an attitude. When you dont understand you say to stop waisting your time. Now what do I mean by pulling trough bits? Aint that clear?

So existence includes God?

Evidence? Reasoning? Any justification or support at all? — unenlightened

Gut feelings, by their very Nature, are not based on conscious rationality. There are no arguments, no reasons, no ratio, no whatever consciohs aspects behind it. Therd are multiple unconscious foundations though.

God and existence are the same thing — EnPassant

Of course not. God created existence.

Gut feeling — Prishon

Allright. If the defense system is fooled by a vaccine it says: WTF? Next time she wont be so cooperating.

But for me life is brief and death is long standing if you consider the ratio of living to dead matter in the universe — Benj96

When you reincarnate in a following big bang death takes 0 time.

The event horizon is point of no return from beyond which no information can be received; that is, only ever approached but never reached alive. — 180 Proof

It depends on the hole. If its big enough you can easily fall in. You end up in a region where time stands still only according to distant observers. If you managed to get out (which is only possible by evaporation...) you would be young while the universe is old. Someone falling in 123567656 years from now you could actually meet.

Anyway, again, I believe you mean resistance about coexisting physical universes ( — Alkis Piskas

I think you make an excellent poit here. But (I wouldnt be me without a but; they even call me the but, "maar" in Dutch; there is Maartje...). For two different people there can be two different physical realities. If I see a complete different physical state of affairs than a fellow man. I can, for example, see sub quarks where others see one quark only. Whats the real thing? Both at the same time? Or are both combined some new physical reality. Or take both approaches in thermodynamics. The statistical approach and the classical. One contains continue media. The other atoms.

Ah! Now its clear what you meant by the event horizon. I had no idea what you meant. Excuse my spelling. On phone. Isnt their a life after the event horizon?

It" what? Evidence? Reasoning? Any justification or support at all? — unenlightened

Gut feeling

There are no 1s and 0s in a PC. There are voltages, or "pits and lands" on an optical disc, and we interpret these as representing 1s and — Daemon

The difference netween the potentials is though that the soike in a neuron is not pulled through by a oot. difference between the two ends of a neuron. Between the body and the axon, that is.

I think taking it is myopic. It gives weak future offspring. When not dead...

Death is the only god.
Def: God - that to which one devotes one's life. — 180 Proof

So one devotes their life to feath?

Thank you for being a patient and respectable dialectic interlocutor Prishon in this thread. From the dialectic process I have learnt something new today. It was cool. Never a waste of time. I salute ~ — Corvus

Hope to see you again! :smile:

Does a digital computer actually compute — Daemon

I a digital computer there is a program (fixed 1s and 0s) let loose on information (flowing 1s and 0s). The programs pulls through the 1s and 0s. By means of a voltage source. Thats computation. In the brain this doesnt happen. Neither in an analogue proces involved in modeling other processes.

The brain though has no explicit storage of information. There are strengths between neurons governing the flow of electricity. When I think of a ball a similar structure rolls around in my brain.

:smile: I could have been born in Curiocity myself!

I can undersand the confusion. An analog(ue?) computer doesnt actually compute.

Thanks for your explanations. Excellent. — Corvus

Your welcome. I didnt see yet the comment before mine. Excellent indeed!

All computer is digital device by my 1st order definition.
Give us your definition of what "analogue" and "computer" is. — Corvus

Analogue: There is a real physical process in the physical world. There is an analogue pricess to that. Say the motion of the planets and an electric process making the same oscillatory motion. Then that electric current is an analogue process and can be used to model the planetary system. No computation by a program on data is involved.

Our world has people in it with conditions that, should they contract the virus, will kill them -- not the virus, but the "co-morbidity". Obesity. Diabetes. Respiratory illnesses. — Srap Tasmaner

Then the flu must be included too. And weak résistance. Vaccinations in the past have reduced that resistance.

Okay then. On one subset of your vector space there is the reality of the dreamtime (I merely compare two realities now but thats sufficient). You have acces to it in your dreams only. Its elements are inner world (mental) structures. They consist out of the content of matter in the physical world. Say you see a god in this world than via this inner world they can give you a message from the world of the gods that lays outside of our universe. If you see a god giving you directions you know what to do in the external physical world. You can dream your girl telling you that she loves you.

The physical world, the second example, is the material aspect of stuff only. Say the matter part. It behaves acvording to Natural laws. It can be described by massless rishon fields on top of a 4d curved spacetime. The fields interact by means of 7 gauge fields. They contribute to the curvature of 4d spacetime which itself is developing on a 5d static substrate. There are hidden variables (necessary for communication with the gods). Particles are Planck sized 3d spheres rolled up on the 5d spacetime.

If you can translate these in two vector spaces go ahead. But I think these spaces are unreachable from one another. Of course the three realities I spoke of (with us as intermediaries) are not out of each other's reach. But I dont see how this translates in one vector space.

I prefer grannies staying alive. But what about them preffering going to a disco? What if that emotion is considered? Is it worse, because selfish? Is being selfish bad? What about the feeling of people (like md but I must take the juice if I wanna go abroad so I will take it) who dont wanna take it because of a gut feeling they have?

The only parts that are legitimately in question are the details, particularly regarding the very earliest stages where gravitation would be significant on the quantum scale. — Seppo

The only parts? Thats the essential part. A new theory could handle it. And I have one.

Dont the examples given make clear that there were computers before the digital ones? They are simply not based on stored information. They are based on non-computed analogues. This makes the term maybe confusing but you can view the analigue representation of a ohysical proces as some kind of continuous computation. Maybe simulator is more appropiate.

Time moves faster for your head than your feet — Michael McMahon

Yes. This causes the tidal force (a non- local force). Relative to a proton the Earth weighs the same as the proton. Its an objective state of affairs.

Again, the examples are fine, but you haven't defined what you mean by reality. That means I am left to draw my own conclusions by what you mean, and I might be off. — Philosophim

The whole point about these realities is that they cant be defined. By defining them you destroy them

I was just making a comment about what you said! Dont you wanna continue? Are you offended that I said that computers can be analogue?

You wrote (in last comments) what I was thinking. It seems hard to imagine that computers are only computers if bits are involved. Thanks again for your examples! Nice material. I wanna use them in a book. I never knew about these guys! Ive only seen one used in a chaotic drop experiment.

One of the reasonable comments! :smile: