MirceaKitsune

Small correction: By 00's I meant between 2000 and 2010. And yeah, I can see how a very strong magnetic field could even lead to cancer. Cell phones in the 90's were believed to be cancerous from what I remember, which is why IIRC there is a limited range of frequencies which are considered safe to use.

I've known for a while that after humans, dolphins are considered the most intelligent race. Some even say that from a biological point of view, dolphins are capable of even more intelligence and "processing power" than man! But among the many things intelligence implies, the part I'm curious about for this discussion is language. From what I understood, dolphins communicate via sonar in a way similar to the morse code. I used to think that this is an ability only them and perhaps a few undiscovered races possess. But several days ago, I saw a documentary about prairie dogs and their communication system, which revealed something surprising: They store information in the frequency of wave lengths in each squeak, which act similar to letters... or something like that. If that's indeed true, it is actually more optimal than the spoken language of people, as we have to form rather long words and sentences to describe something. Anyway, there are mainly two curiosities I had. First of all, what are the known species which have a complex spoken language? By complex, I mean not barking just to make noise in order to attract attention, but making noises which store actual information. From what I've seen recently, this is more present in nature than at least I expected... and that's a wonderful thing! My second and biggest curiosity however, is if people were able to decode any such languages yet. The film about prairie dogs failed to mention that, but gave the impression scientists are rather at the stage of discovering this exists at all. For dolphins however, I heard better news some time ago, as an expert in this field stated "we should finish decoding their language in 4 or 5 years". Sounds promising enough. A funny yet considerable thought that this lead me to, is if someday tablets or smartphones might contain converters for animal languages. If there is indeed information in some creature's squeaks or sonar clicks, a device with a capable microphone could analyze the wave length of a sound and separate the different frequencies, then assign the output to a common word and print it. Oppositely, the user could select words from a list, each word assigned to a function which generates and plays an audio file containing the proper clicks or squeaks. As an idea it might sound rather weird, but I think it would be quite a thing if this was realistically possible.

I recently saw a documentary about wireless charging devices. It didn't go into quite a lot of technical detail, but it explained how it uses magnetic forces to transfer electricity over the air. The whole discussion made me curious about a bunch of things, regarding the idea of wireless charging: 1 - Rather than using a magnetic field, I often wondered whether this could be done over short distances with an electric arc. The question of course is if it's possible to have electric arcs over distances of even a meter, but which are not dangerous to any living being touching it. From what I know, this is sadly not possible... as the voltage requited to get an arc over such a distance should be very big. After all, even the arc in an electric lighter where the two metals are milimiters away from each other stings badly if you touch it. But maybe there's still a balance which can create a harmless arc? Like filling the environment with a special gas, or use smart materials? 2 - Getting back to wireless charging via magnetism; From what was explained, it sounds like this is a rather simple technology, and something that could have been done in the past. Instead, the system was said to only become available later this year or next year. Why didn't wireless charging reach the market during the late 00's as worst? 3 - How far will wireless charging via magnetic field be able to go? It's nice that it will allow you to charge your phone by putting it in a pot... and I saw that parking lots are getting such chargers under the pavement for compatibility with electric cars even. But will it be possible to power entire houses with it? And is there a chance that in the future, such magnetic fields could encompass whole cities... meaning that laptops and mobile phones will permanently have their battery charged wherever you go? 4 - I know that realistically this is very unlikely, but I'm still curious: If someone were to build a huge generator or battery... say a few hundred meters tall. Could it convert the Earth's megnetic field into any useful amount of electric current? In an actual scenario however, how much electricity could be extracted from the Earth's magnetic field? I'm estimating that one would need an enormous device to even power a little led with it, since the field is probably not that strong. Still, I do believe that small satellites and space stations obribing Earth might be able to do this in order to regenerate power... in case none are already.

Yeah, that's very likely what happened. My curiosity was when and how this can happen. Sounds and voice are specific vibrations of air... the ears can only hear what exists. But this experience means that the brain can somehow replace the signal before it processes it, or lose information and get something malformed as the "final product".

Very nice! I didn't hope that any fuel could actually burn in water, was thinking of special liquids mostly. Physics can do so many amazing things.

Very sure it wasn't the case. He / she was calling out in our language, with the same tone and everything. Whatever happened took place somewhere between the ear and the brain. One more detail I think I remember is that when I started hearing the merchant, I was still sleeping. At first I started hearing them in a dream, which is where I heard the words in another language. Soon after however, I opened my eyes and stood up, completely awake and aware again. Even after that however, I kept hearing them in this other language, until I focused hard enough and my mind snapped back in place.

In everyday life, chances are you only see fire where there's air. Still, there's a slightly surrealistic concept that intrigued me: Fire in a liquid. The liquid plays the role of the oxidant, and anything submerged can be the fuel. The liquid is of course consumed and transformed, but doesn't combust itself. Is this ever possible with any combination of chemicals? As far as I know, there's no material that can burn under water as we know it... typical fire reqiures oxygen. On the other side, fluids that do combust get ignited themselves... so starting a fire in a gas tank causes the whole tank to blow up. But is there ever a middle way? Is there any fluid inside which you can light a match and start a fire, the flame being fed by the fluid like normal fire is maintained by oxygen? Update - I just saw a video which confirms one way in which this is possible. Objects can apparently burn in liquid oxygen, similar to how they burn in gas oxygen. Now I wonder what would happen if someone attempted to spark a flame in a block of solid oxygen

Alright... it just caugth me after a statement in another thread, as well as helpful replies here. Some materials (like wood) aren't made of a single element, but a variety of different atom types linked together... which is what I was failing to consider. Before heat gets to melt all those components as a whole, it disintegrates various atomic combinations first, right? That's why burning wood produces many things (smoke, ash) while also requiring oxygen for the reaction. All those individual components however should behave by the cassic model (solid - liquid - gas) if each is brought to the right temperature for that to happen.

Sorry about that. I used to think heat is the speed at which electrons orbit around the nucleus, which in turn determine the vibration of the atoms from one another. Still, what would happen if electron spin and / or vibration went to extremely low levels? Is there a point at which the object would disintegrate, because there's not enough force to keep the atoms together? And thanks for clearing that up regarding wood. It didn't catch me that its composition is a more complex and diverse molecular structure, which explains its different behavior at times (like burning rather than melting).

I was recently sitting and thinking of atoms and physics. Something interesting popped to mind... which is likely explained and confirmed / infirmed, although I never saw the idea discussed anywhere. Atoms are held together by the electrons around each nucleus, their spin influencing the strength of atomic bonds and the solidity of the material. The faster those electrons spin, the weaker the interaction. This is why most materials start to melt when it gets too hot, becoming liquid then gas. Oppositely, cold means that the bonds between atoms are stronger, so most materials get harder when temperatures are low. But if my understanding of physics are right, materials should disintegrate at both temperature extremes. For heat it's obvious why... the electrons spin so fast that each atom loses its grip on its neighbor, leading from solid to liquid then to gas. But cold means that the electrons spin slower. And extreme cold should mean that the electrons... almost stop spinning at all. If they stop spinning, there should once again be no force to pull the atoms together. Doesn't this mean that at extremely low temperatures, any material would eventually turn into something similar to ash or gas? What does happen to various materials (wood, metal, stone, etc) at extremelt low temperatures... so low that the slow spin of electrons cause atomic bonds to weaken? Can cold even turn solid metal or stone to dust?

Although this is something I should probably know as someone interested in theoretical physics, it's still a thing I never actually understood. So although a "n00b" question, I was wondering: Why is it that fire or extreme heat will melt / evaporate some materials while turning others to ash? I understand melting and evaporating, caused by heat reducing the bonds between atoms and making the material softer. This happens with most things... water, metal, stone, so on. But wood for instance will not melt into a liquid. It turns into ash... and I never heard of ash turning into a liquid or gas at any temperature. Why does this happen at an atomic scale? Also, what does eventually happen to a wooden log at extreme temperatures? Does the ash simply get smaller, or is there a point at which it turns from solid to liquid and from liquid to vapor too? As one more curiosity, how does this relate to burning? Most materials which turn from solid to liquid never cause a flame... such as metal melting. Plastic and rubber for instance do melt temporarily, but they also burn with a flame. Wood burns with a flame too but doesn't melt, only becomes ashes.

Many people probably had weird experiences when waking up, while transitioning between being asleep and the brain re-activating. I've had several myself... but there's one in particular which I never found an answer to and fascinated me quite a bit. It happened quite some time ago (I believe two or three years) but I still remember it pretty well. Over where I live, it's still common for merchants who buy and sell things to walk through the city yelling "we buy / sell whatever" as hard as they can. Sometimes that happens while I'm still sleeping, and I was occasionally woken up by said merchants. One morning however, such a merchant was the subject of a strange and interesting experience about how the brain works. When I woke up, I heard someone talking in a language I couldn't understand. I stood up for several seconds and listened in confusion, trying to make out what was being said. It was only soon after that I started hearing the words in my own language again, and realized it was another merchant walking the street. The interesting part isn't that I couldn't understand what was being said, since I assume it's possible for language recognition to take a while to reactivate when waking up. What ingrigues me is that I was basically hearing entirely different words than those being spoken. My brain modified the voice reaching my ears, and I heard the same voice saying something else. Imagine someone next to you saying "Hello, how are you" and you hearing something like "Alala, haba ala ola" in the exact same accent and tone. Did anyone else ever experience their brain modifying words that way? And does anyone know when and how the mind can make complete replacements to sounds and maybe even images, which can even be completely unnoticeable from reality?

I've kept thinking about this every few days. Sadly I can't imagine how to put it into a formula, considering mathematics is far from my strongest point. I am however thinking of drawing it on a chart and analyzing it geometrically some more, in hopes this helps find more logics and arguments. What I currently do is shrink the concept down to a familiar level of dimensions. I imagine an 1D universe (a line) on which a single particle (a point) exists. This particle starts at the center but can have any velocity up or down. Time is the 2nd dimension, so our line universe extends into a square, each segment of the square representing a frame of time. On the imaginary surface of this square, the particle "draws" a seamless line as it moves, each point of this line being the particle in a given position at a given moment. Lastly, the square itself extends into a 3D cube, and each square in this cube represents a parallel time. At any moment when the particle's movement could take a different course, the particle divides and one copy moves into the 3rd dimension, landing onto the nearest other square (space + time stack) and continuing on a different trajectory there. If we analyze all lines the particle has "drawn" inside this virtual cube, we'd see a pattern similar to a messy spider web in a box. The catch is, an observer will only position itself relative to the particle in the 3rd dimension once he observes the particle. Among many things, I'm speculating this might even explain the expansion of the universe. As particles take different choices all over the cosmos, they fill the 5th dimension with copies of themselves and / or with information, increasing the fabric of spacetime by also expanding lower dimensions. Think of it as having a soap bubble, and pouring more liquid soap over its surface. With each drop of soap, the size of the bubble increases in all 3 directions, as the bubble's surface tends toward spherical. That's only a raw idea of course, with high chances of being far from true. I'm just saying that in my humble opinion, if people looked at many phenomenons through the prism of time lines and higher spatial dimensions, a lot might start to make more sense. If it's any motivation, a science documentary (Through The Wormhole with Morgan Freeman) was very close to stating the same quantum + timeline theory. It was discussing the paradox of time travel, and how "going back in time and killing your father would mean you'd have never existed and couldn't have committed this action". The solution was that the actions of traveling in time and killing your father are both choices, so they branch into a parallel time and will not break or erase any part of reality. Quantum leaps were presented as indication of this, although it wasn't explicitly said the electron is going between parallel existences.

Thank you, that is helpful. Yeah spectral lines were the topic when this was mentioned. I can better see how photons interact with protons / neutrons / electrons now, but I'm still curious how and when it affects / triggers a quantum leap for a particle too.

It's often science documentaries that give me new ideas or offer information on existing ones. Same with an awesome series about spacetime, which recently mentioned something I didn't know about although it didn't elaborate much on. Best idea felt to ask. From what I knew, the leap of an electron into different orbits happens at a constant or random rate. In other words, no interference (at least known to people) typically triggers an electron to "appear" in another location... it just happens based on probability. I did hear that "electrons borrow energy from their surroundings and give it back later", but that still means no known event triggers the leap itself. A documentary about light however said that particles of light (photons) might be a cause for this. If I remember right, the idea was that photons bumping into an electron pushes it into another state. When it comes back from that state, that electron produces a burst of light or energy. It said very little on this matter, but the idea still intrigued me. Is there more known about this? When does a light particle hitting an electron cause it to change orbit / state? Does this mean that particles in completely dark areas show less or no behavior by quantum laws? Is it a rule that two particles need to collide for one or both of them to change location?

One detail to clarify: I do believe that consciousness exists independently of matter as we know it to an extent... it might for example be similar to energy. Just that for consciousness to form / evolve / manifest, it needs a form under which it experiences life, and that form is created by matter and physics (the first bacteria). The "building blocks" necessary for creating a consciousness were most likely brought by the big bang too, or formed from effects inside this universe... hence why I believe matter in various forms was all that could have been there first.

Here's one problem: When do you conclude research has proven something and that something is known fact? Sometimes, not even a mathematical formula stands as 100% proof. While at other times there aren't mathematics there yet, but something is obviously happening... for example if people observed quantum physics before anyone wrote formula for them, they'd know quantum laws exist. In this case, what would qualify as proof for the statement that consciousness came before or after matter? At least until spirituality will be explained in a scientific and not religious way, we need to draw conclusions from something. Considering things such as the evolution of life (taking place on planets which imply they formed first) and all the complex laws of physics which I don't see how a consciousness could have put there and be maintaining since before the beginning of time itself, the only conclusion is that consciousness evolves after the physics and chemestry of a planet create a body that it can manifest in.

I mostly share the same opinion, though again I don't want to actually offend those who don't. It's not always religion either... I used to believe something similar before I got more directly into science, though I was never religious nor believed any religious statements. Oh, and one more thing I forgot to mention: I believe PeterJ mentioned wishful thinking over me disregarding the idea of consciousness fueling matter or existing prior to it. I remember that when I accepted the idea that matter was there first, it actually came as rather a shock, and it was a scary thing to think of. I felt much more comfortable with the idea that everything we experience is created by our minds, even if we don't have control of it directly (hence why we can't fly like Peter Pan). I still wouldn't mind living in such an universe if one existed, so if I was wishfully thinking it would be opposite of what I'm stating here.

Yes... I do actually remember there is a competing theory (which isn't worth discrediting entirely) that all matter and everything we see might be created either by the mind of each individual, or by the combined consciousnes of all living beings. I actually used to believe that fairly recently, but heard enough contradictions I actually thought it was just my lack of knowledge and this is officialy false from science's point of view. Regardless of my certainty on this matter, I didn't mean to throw mud over this theory and its followers if there is one still standing. The primary reason why I said "all planets / stars are there and doing their thing regardless if there's life to observe them or not" is that particles are made of energy that's exterior (to some extent) from individual living beings. All creatures (at least in a physical world like we know of) observe their environment through input functions designed into their body... such as eyes to see and ears to hear. So for instance, observing an object means that the object reflects rays of light into a person's eye, and the brain's sophisticated mechanism interprets that signal. This would mean that if no living being received such input from a group of particles, those particles would cease existing. There's no way to test whether this is true or not, but there's really no logical or theoretical basis (at least that I know of) which would give this hopes being possible. Beyond that, if it was the case we would probably see some very weird results, such as: A person locks an object in a room where no one else can ever see / hear it or know about it, notes down what the object is, asks someone completely unaware to open the room only after he dies of old age and read the node afterward, then once this happens the viewer might find something else than what the person put inside. Also, if someone was able to convince themself beyond any doubt that a glass of wine exists in an empty shelf, they would find one when they opened the door. Such behavior should be inevitably recorded throughout history if conscious awareness was needed to make matter be there... unless an all-seeing being is constantly watching every quark in every particle of every atom in every single thing in this universe. Beyond that, I don't see how a conscious mind might be simulating (or rather emulating) all those complex rules of the universe... some that might not be known by any living being in it. Think about this: 300 years ago, no one even imegined quantum physics. Yet phenomenons which are tied to it happened exactly as they do today. It creates a "chicken and the egg" paradox: For life that's even slightly aware of its surroundings to develop, it needs a form to manifest in... a system which includes seeing hearing touching or anything which can receive input, and help that consciousness learn its surroundings and make sense of them. But to create any form such as biological life, you need matter first. There's no logical way in which life intelligent enough to know how such physics of the universe existed after the first moments of the universe's birth, when laws such as attraction between particles were already there. I'm glad I posted this, since it also answers the initial question of the thread... at least my view of it I mean. But it's the main reason why I believe matter will not change its behavior when not observed... even if I strongly think that consciousness can interact with matter in ways people are yet to discover. Yes, I am inclined to believe telekinesis is possible for example... so when a consciousness is strong enough it can act over a group of particles, although this would be very rare with humans and all known life.

Although the building blocks of life are indeed part of what makes the universe, or were likely there since its early days, life itself evolved later within this system. As a professional documantary on this subject said, the universe took a long time to cool down after its creation. If I remember right, it was also mentioned that only millions of years later light actually appeared, when the first sources of light came to be. The only thing I stated (because it's obvious and known fact) is that there weren't conscious beings floating all over through blackness before the big-bang brought matter, who themselves contributed to matter being what it is and designed how particles work. Planets formed later, and conscious / aware / intelligent life evolved after that... unless we're talking about creatures which can float through space which evolution might have even created before planets and suns. But even if life here on Earth (including people and beliefs about gods) wouldn't have existed, as well life on any other planet, there would still be the same galaxies and solar systems orbiting and doing the same thing. No one put them there by hand, and there's no consciousness causing all those stars to sit there. This is the only thing I wanted to state. If people think it's insane or offending to believe that matter can exist before conscious life, I'm probably very outdated on some subjects.

Actually, I'm doing quite the opposite of wishful thinking... I analyze things and try to see how they work. Which is however not the case here, because this is not a breakthrough nor something I learned... it's common knowledge as far as I'm aware. The physics of the universe created life, not a conscious being which designed the universe and drew life on Earth with a brush. I don't want to start a religious argue so this is as much as it felt fair to reply.

It's something I remember very well... including the exact moments from the dream. I actually posted about it on another forum a few weeks after it happened, though I can no longer find my post there apparently. I also actually named most pictures I took of the place in the following years "the dream parking lot" But yeah, I remember this very exactly. Dreams are indeed often based on events that have happened or will happen, and most people (myself included) usually dream about something from the past or that we know is coming. But those are things in the person's conscious or subconscious memory, and involve the person having the information of what they are dreaming. In this case however, I dreamed a place I haven't seen or had any hints about to the smallest architectural detail... precise information that couldn't have existed anywhere in my brain at that time. Logically, that means it came from somewhere somehow. And since I know there aren't any gods sending rewards or messages or anything, it can only mean this is part of a system that hasn't been debunked yet... but which will probably be an amazing discovery once it is! And that's nice to know. I hope that research will get somewhere within the next years.

The reason I said "confirmation" and not "proof" is because I'm aware there is no proof, given that technology to record dreams as video doesn't exist today nor did 9 years ago. So although it's frustrating, the only real proof is to myself. I can however do as much as confirming (based on this experience) that I've seen it be possible thanks to this event. And hope that posts like this, in case anyone else had others and shared them, might lead to someone coming up with at least a solid hypothesis as to how it works. I'd really hope to know how it works and how this happened someday, although it might be a while till that's possible sadly.

I see. From what I heard, entanglement means that if you give one particle a certain spin, the other one will have an opposite spin. So if someone could make a device that detects and translates changes in a particle's spin as binary data (zeroes and ones) I imagined it would work out.

After thinking for a while, I decided that posting about this would be a good choice. Although most of this discussion can probably be classified as paranormal, I'm posting it hopes that it will be useful in a scientific manner, such as better understanding how consciousness works. So think of this as an experiment I did unknowingly. As it will be obvious, there's no way in which I can offer proof for what I will say, and the best I can do is promise that these are the real events as I recall them. I don't expect everyone to believe me either, but this is for everyone to make what they will of. If it's in the incorrect forum area also, I apologize and please move it in the right section. - What happened: This took place about 9 years ago, back when I was 16. My parents had recently re-established contact with an old family friend after many years. He agreed to take us to his house at the other side of the country from where we live, to stay for a week and celebrate new year. I remember being informed about it approximately two weeks before the trip. I was only told the name of the city and its location on the map, although I had never been in that part of the country and had no idea what it generally even looked like. More than a week before the trip, I had an unusually lucid dream: I was lying on the back seat of a taxi, covered in blankets and cold from having a high fever. The taxi then pulled over to a muddy parking lot near a restaurant, and asked me to get out. I found the strength to uncover myself and step outside in the cold, then the cab drove away. I was left wondering around that area, apparently looking for someone who was supposed to be waiting for me there. The relevant part is that my vision was very vivid for a dream, and I could perceive as many details as one can generally remember in real life. A week after that, it was time for our trip. Our friend arrived in the morning to pick us up, and after a several hour drive we got to his house at the other side of the country. Soon after we unpacked, he wanted to take us to his favorite restaurant just a few kilometers away. So we all got back in the car and went there. Once we reached our destination and I steppted outside, I was petrified: It was precisely the area I had dreamed of... up to the smallest detail. There was only one error... a missing fence on the other side of the road, otherwise some small objects such as signs were also missing. - Images: I was able to find three good photos of the place I took in 2010, and attached them to this post. #1 shows the parking lot where the cab dropped me off in the dream. #2 shows the restaurant and its fence. #3 shows the road in front of that restaurant. Basically, almost everything you see in these images I saw in my dream before actually going there or having any hint about the place. The muddy parking lot, including the poles behind it and the grassy area behind that. The restaurant building and everything about it... the architecture, the color, the position and shape of every single door and window, the shape color position and length of the black fence with a stone base surrounding it (also reaching the parking lot) and even the gate on that fence and its connection to the road. The cement parking lot in front of the restaurant, which I remember had cars on it too. The shape of the road, which has a straight segment near the restaurant but steers away from it at a distance, both before and after. The meadows on the other side of the road, on which I actually went walking in the dream (the fence between it and the road didn't exist, that was the only innacuracy). I even remember the street lights... and yes, I think the houses which can be seen in the distance where there too. I also saw the little villa behind the restaurant and inside the garden, slightly visible in image #2. - My conclusions: This is the only experience of this sort I've ever had in my life... yet it puzzled me for a decade. At the time, I used to think this was some special sign with a meaning. Whenever we went to that restaurant, I stood in that parking lot and tried to figure out what and why had happened. At this day however, my understanding of the universe is different. I realize that consciousness among many things are an unexplored branch of science, and that these things make perfect sense even if we don't yet know how. For this reason, I realized it would be best to share what happened rather than keeping it to myself, because it might help confirm things other people noticed for instance. Someday, one person might even come up with a theory on how out-of-body input / output of information works, based on events like this. The only thing I know beyond any doubt is that there was some kind of remote viewing involved, or information traveling backward in time under some form. It would be insane to believe something this big could have been a coincidence, because at such detail there's not one chance in a billion. And this comes from someone who has a hard time believing things even when I see proof at times, because I hate being deluded especially with such matters. This experience has also been my only form of clear and solid proof that spirit and a consciousness outside of this body exist. Without it, I would have probably had a lot of fears and doubts related to that for many years. Feel free to post your opinions if you wish, or ask any questions (do note this was 9 years ago and I might have forgotten some details, although the event stuck with me to this day). Like I said, I hope this might help others come up with theories and conclusions, and maybe someday an experience like this will.