LGP Science Thread

[Kraftster]

With no time, there can be no motion.
With no time, there can also be no cause and effect.
With no motion, there can be no cause and effect.
With no cause and effect, there can be no motion.
Without motion and cause and effect our brains don't work. (if you buy that our brains and thought occur within the physical world at least)

[columbia]

You are losing me P_G.
Who is saying that there is no room for thought?

[Kraftster]

You are losing me P_G.
Who is saying that there is no room for thought?

*raises hand*

[columbia]

With no time, there can be no motion.
With no time, there can also be no cause and effect.
With no motion, there can be no cause and effect.
With no cause and effect, there can be no motion.
Without motion and cause and effect our brains don't work. (if you buy that our brains and thought occur within the physical world at least)

Is this the next warz clue?

[Physical_Graffiti]

So if the mind cannot perceive everything that exists before it, should I question my atheism?

"Nothing is true. Everything is permitted"

[Physical_Graffiti]

With no time, there can be no motion.
With no time, there can also be no cause and effect.
With no motion, there can be no cause and effect.
With no cause and effect, there can be no motion.
Without motion and cause and effect our brains don't work. (if you buy that our brains and thought occur within the physical world at least)

There's motion because we perceive there to be motion. No?

[Kraftster]

With no time, there can be no motion.
With no time, there can also be no cause and effect.
With no motion, there can be no cause and effect.
With no cause and effect, there can be no motion.
Without motion and cause and effect our brains don't work. (if you buy that our brains and thought occur within the physical world at least)

There's motion because we perceive there to be motion. No?

But how do we perceive?? (if there is no motion and its just a perception)

[columbia]

I have to be up in 6 hours....good night gentlemen.

Weak.

[Kraftster]

[Physical_Graffiti]

With no time, there can be no motion.
With no time, there can also be no cause and effect.
With no motion, there can be no cause and effect.
With no cause and effect, there can be no motion.
Without motion and cause and effect our brains don't work. (if you buy that our brains and thought occur within the physical world at least)

There's motion because we perceive there to be motion. No?

But how do we perceive?? (if there is no motion and its just a perception)

It is possible to perceive motion when the physical stimulus is not moving:

[Kraftster]

With no time, there can be no motion.
With no time, there can also be no cause and effect.
With no motion, there can be no cause and effect.
With no cause and effect, there can be no motion.
Without motion and cause and effect our brains don't work. (if you buy that our brains and thought occur within the physical world at least)

There's motion because we perceive there to be motion. No?

But how do we perceive?? (if there is no motion and its just a perception)

It is possible to perceive motion when the physical stimulus is not moving:

You're focusing on what's being observed, I'm focusing on what's doing the observing.

I agree with you that our brain can (and does all the time) piece together motion where there is none. But, in order to do that, our brain requires cause and effect, physics, chemsitry, the laws of nature. It seems to me that the stills scenario obliterates cause and effect. Without cause and effect, our brains (and everything) don't work, at least not how we presently understand them to work.

[Physical_Graffiti]

You're focusing on what's being observed, I'm focusing on what's doing the observing.

I agree with you that our brain can (and does all the time) piece together motion where there is none. But, in order to do that, our brain requires cause and effect, physics, chemsitry, the laws of nature. It seems to me that the stills scenario obliterates cause and effect. Without cause and effect, our brains (and everything) don't work, at least not how we presently understand them to work.

I see. Sound logic, homes.

[Kraftster]

I guess there's no reason the example you gave could not be extended to the brain. Perhaps what we perceive as cause and effect is already the illusion. If that's the case with motion of a ball, no reason its not the case with neurons in the brain, I 'spose. Our perception of how we perceive is an illusion just like everything else. ( )

[Kraftster]

You're focusing on what's being observed, I'm focusing on what's doing the observing.

I agree with you that our brain can (and does all the time) piece together motion where there is none. But, in order to do that, our brain requires cause and effect, physics, chemsitry, the laws of nature. It seems to me that the stills scenario obliterates cause and effect. Without cause and effect, our brains (and everything) don't work, at least not how we presently understand them to work.

I see. Sound logic, homes. Just shut up already.

Right?

[bhaw]

I guess there's no reason the example you gave could not be extended to the brain. Perhaps what we perceive as cause and effect is already the illusion. If that's the case with motion of a ball, no reason its not the case with neurons in the brain, I 'spose. Our perception of how we perceive is an illusion just like everything else. ( )

Such world would probably be highly dependent on an omnipotent creator.

[Kraftster]

I guess there's no reason the example you gave could not be extended to the brain. Perhaps what we perceive as cause and effect is already the illusion. If that's the case with motion of a ball, no reason its not the case with neurons in the brain, I 'spose. Our perception of how we perceive is an illusion just like everything else. ( )

Such world would probably be highly dependent on an omnipotent creator.

At first blush, I'd be more inclined to believe that I'm here because of the creation of an omnipotent divine creator than I would be to believe that our perception of everything is all an illusion generated by some mental process we don't understand which makes it feel like a bunch of stills randomly organized (yet somehow consistently relating to one another) are in motion and in time.

[Physical_Graffiti]

You're focusing on what's being observed, I'm focusing on what's doing the observing.

I agree with you that our brain can (and does all the time) piece together motion where there is none. But, in order to do that, our brain requires cause and effect, physics, chemsitry, the laws of nature. It seems to me that the stills scenario obliterates cause and effect. Without cause and effect, our brains (and everything) don't work, at least not how we presently understand them to work.

I see. Sound logic, homes. Just shut up already.

Right?

I enjoyed this discussion.

Just to be clear: I have no idea on whether I believe that line of thought or not.

[Kraftster]

You're focusing on what's being observed, I'm focusing on what's doing the observing.

I agree with you that our brain can (and does all the time) piece together motion where there is none. But, in order to do that, our brain requires cause and effect, physics, chemsitry, the laws of nature. It seems to me that the stills scenario obliterates cause and effect. Without cause and effect, our brains (and everything) don't work, at least not how we presently understand them to work.

I see. Sound logic, homes. Just shut up already.

Right?

I enjoyed this discussion.

Just to be clear: I have no idea on whether I believe that line of thought or not.

Me neither.

[bhaw]

I guess there's no reason the example you gave could not be extended to the brain. Perhaps what we perceive as cause and effect is already the illusion. If that's the case with motion of a ball, no reason its not the case with neurons in the brain, I 'spose. Our perception of how we perceive is an illusion just like everything else. ( )

Such world would probably be highly dependent on an omnipotent creator.

At first blush, I'd be more inclined to believe that I'm here because of the creation of an omnipotent divine creator than I would be to believe that our perception of everything is all an illusion generated by some mental process we don't understand which makes it feel like a bunch of stills randomly organized (yet somehow consistently relating to one another) are in motion and in time.

I agree. Just saying.

I remember from philosophy that there is a line of thinking that is along the same lines, but instead of being a bunch of stills, we are all just existing in our own mind and not actually WITH each other. So if you apply that, our brain isn't relating to one another, I am just creating the relation in my own head.

That's a one off, but in the end, I'm more inclined to go with traditional thought and science on this one. I have a hard time even seeing how this "stills" line of existence could even make sense beyond being a neat alternative to talk about.

[Kraftster]

I subscribe to that line of thinking to some extent. I believe with 10/10 certainty that I exist, but I'm only at about a 9.5 for you (and everyone else).

I agree on it being a silly alternative theory too. The guy kind of annoys me the more I read about him.

[obhave]

Could scientists of just discovered antiviral drug that could cure multiple different viral infections?

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/antiviral-0810.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ILikeTurtles]

New IBM computer chip mimics the human brain
http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/innovation ... google_cnn

(CNN) -- Making computers behave like humans has taken another step forward.

IBM on Thursday announced it has created a chip designed to imitate the human brain's ability to understand its surroundings, act on things that happen around it and make sense of complex data.

[doublem]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/scien ... .html?_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Team Claims It Has Found Oldest Fossils.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/scien ... .html?_r=1

Team Claims It Has Found Oldest Fossils.

In before JoePa joke.

[doublem]

Why we'll never have children.
People tell my wife and me that we'll change our minds. But I can't bear the idea of passing on my mental illness.

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/ ... _have_kids" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;