Bluemercury

Do you not find the word bullshit offensive?

lol goodness me, i thought my responses had been fairly restrained, im not so much passive aggressive more frustrated by the narrow mindedness of some of the comments that have been made. but im having a good laugh right now, you simply do not have the ability to upset me, your inappropriate language however is and should be a concern to someone, very unprofessional, i would also be concerned that o is going to pop a blood vessel. maybe some of his friends above can calm him, i was finished but your rude behavior prompted me to respond. now you can leave it at that or carry on berating me if you like, I think you should stop. I would appeal to the fair minded and reasonable moderates to restrain the inappropriate language that has been displayed, i have backed down already and have no more to say on the original subject if all o has to contribute is insults then he probably should not have a position of authority on this forum. I think he is encouraging others to display the same poor behavior. If anyone would care to count the insults made by me and against me then the statistical analysis will speak for its self, i however do apologize for any perceived hostility, but i was raised by a lawyer and know of no other way to express myself, i was also brought up to be direct but not rude. in another time i would have demanded satisfaction, but.....strangely enough i already have it. AJB you sir seem a fair minded person can you please tell him to let it go, i chose my battles carefully. and want my personal detailed removed if possible to prevent further harassment outside of this forum. Thank you all yes even you, and all the best. feel free to let this conversation end. as it no longer serves any purpose. Please feel free to delete the entire thing i know longer care is that plain enough for you. i simply had an idea and some questions and well look what its come down too sad. Sorry for repeating myself but i wanted to make sure im understood. I also give a big apology to the gentlemen who started this thread, i don't know what happened he seems to have followed me here sorry Andres. whatever else is said i will not be responding further i am now going to purge this site from my network all the best to you.

Thanks for that, ill go to my room and sulk now, ill keep my confidence although ill consider myself "put in my place". As for the rest only time will tell. Unfortunately real life requires my attention. my mind is probably more suited to .....well ill keep that to myself. I sense a defensiveness in some of the above comments. As for me i have nothing more to add. I'm off on holidays now so a merry Christmas to you all. Bluemercury. NO REPLY REQUIRED

Oh dear o. you miss my point and you make it at the same time, there is NO agreed definition its all vague, no one definition ie...crude. im not saying math is crude it is absolute for the most part - minus some smoke and mirrors. I don't want to have a definition i want to know what the definition is. i thought YOU might know?? Silly is not very scientific, i stated a simple truth, is it not true?? You may answer these questions directly if you can, but you don't have to, I make no demands of YOU. I respect your knowledge in some fields and will read you answers carefully. My apologies to AndresKiani for getting off topic Thanks for your time and space. anyone for chess...lol Oh dear i just realized that an average PC will beat 99.99999% of humans. You have commented on half of the above post can i assume you agree with the rest.

Well sorry to keep you waiting 1. You can look that up just as easily as i did, too much to write here. good luck finding one definitive answer. 2. That,s obvious "Humans" Eg... the inherent limitations of the human mind. Eg.... I have a 10 Dollar calculator that can calculate faster than... ill be nice and say us. Hope this helps. The human brain isn’t exactly like a hard drive either. It’s not prone to filling up, although there must be a point at which it will fill because there are limits to everything physical. Plus, human memory is so prone to fading (I know mine is) that the brain probably keeps plenty of space since not everything is retained indefinitely. The brain is so complex that we’re a long way from discovering all of its mysteries, and we might never actually know how much space it has. regardless the computer will catch up then overtake it is evolving at least 1000x faster than we are. Eg... Remember 640KB +10years Megabytes + 10years Gigabytes +10years Terabytes +10years....well you see what i mean. Thanks. I must add that Stephen Hawkins is very concerned about this, he feels we may eventually be superseded.

Reasonable question, i think it would still need to establish the rules, and test certain things, but without our emotional and psychological traits i feel sure it would be more effective at reaching its conclusions, not to mention being somewhat quicker at doing it, it being reaching definitive results. Thanks

Thank you i find this very interesting. In my profession we have a similar problem with large amounts of unloomed cables, the key to fixing is to look for loops, and by reversing these loops even an apparently impossible complex mess will be unraveled without any cutting. not sure what the mathematical equivalent would be, this is just a thought. The basic rules where when you feed many loose cables into a confined space knotting will happen. as long as one end of each cable was not in that space UN-looping was always possible. Thanks for the thought.

I was thinking more of replacing it not helping it. but for now keep up the struggle. thanks If you look at the current definition of science (and even that is not agreed on) pure logical AI would not require such a crude instrument..

Ill leave it up to the big boys and girls at the LHC, there is no logic in continuing this debate, the goal posts keep moving, but feel free to keep debating amongst yourselves, its safer that way. I have a better understanding now as to what Science is, and what it is not. and for that i thank you. Thanks.

Interesting, so which is it expanding or not, i thought all the tests from around the world confirmed it is, you cant have it both ways, with this type of uncertainty i do wonder if we really know anything for sure 1+1=2 is that a fact Yes/No I have heard talk that the whole shammozzel could be a hologram. lets face the only fact we are ALL babes in the woods clutching at whatever our limited minds can take in. i think we need AI humans are flawed. Now i have depressed myself. Thanks WARNING please take this with a sense of humor especially o.

Thank you very much for getting involved, i agree with what you stated above, Thanks for this clear statement of fact It puts what im trying to say more clearly thank you. this threads intention was to flush this out and to seek out any other strange coincidences? But it bogged down into a debate on thinking. Off topic i agree. As for the humor i was not expecting humor from that user so i missed it. Thanks and good luck to you all.

Deleted by mod; OT, and PM means private message, Not "something I can post in a thread" message. Thank you you have corrected me, the wright brothers were not a good example, in making my point i concede. I can only guess you were wrong and your work here is not done.

I think we can all see were the ego problem is here, What you have proposed is reasonable, i imagine to the majority. keep thinking Yours sincerely Bluemercury.

That is fair, i am flawed by my impatience and for that i am sorry, but i refuse to stop thinking as some would have me do. My idea of the perfect mind is a fine balance between imagination and logic, otherwise we may as well just focus on computers as they are capable of evolving 1000 times faster than we humans. think about what makes us different enough to offset that fact. Thanks. I am also concerned that at a certain level a type of elitism creeps in which is not helpful to our continued evolution.

More trial and error than math. but more importantly it was all started by imagination. not science, as there was no science of aerodynamics when they started. Everything you have stated is true and i thank you for your thoughts.

Yes, the danger of getting out of the tree is that you may no longer see the forest, I would encourage you to keep your open mind. question everything because some will not.

Your statements do not support that proposition. Not relevant. Thanks for your time and space.

Excellent question. in my humble opinion in the balance of probability i think. yes. Lets face it if i was up to just math the universe would not still be expanding at an increasing rate, -which has been proven fact- our knowledge of physics is still evolving -fact-. Questions like this will ensure that nothing is missed.

Unfortunately you again miss the point, your points seem somewhat narrow to me, i could rebuke every point you have made but that is not the purpose of my tread. I Finnish with the simple observation that evolution in all its form favors the generalist, you must know what eventually happens to rigid specialists. If i follow your logic to its natural conclusion, no idea would exist Thanks for your well thought out responses, all your ideas are more than welcome. 1900 years before we knew, and i have a feeling it may have advanced the subject somewhat. i think most particle physicists are glad he made his simple loose suggestion. Can you really not see the point, with all due respect open your mind.

Very good thank you main difference would be artificial vs natural, Thanks. I totally disagree with this proposition, think about it what came first the Expert or the Subject. eg a bicycle maker started maned flight, simplest example. there are many more dramatic examples, i can only suggest you research the evolution of ideas. you may be surprised. Thanks Democritus (dĭmŏkˈrĭtəs) c.460–c.370 B.C., Greek philosopher of Abrade; pupil of Leucippus. His theory of the nature of the physical world was the most radical and scientific attempted up to his time. He avoided the abstractions of his predecessors, Anaxagoras (mind) and Empedocles (harmony and discord), by employing consistent mechanistic postulates that required no supernatural intervention. He held that all things were composed of atoms. 2000 Years ago Thanks Even if you abstractly consider Democritus to be a scientist his teachers were not there abstract though trigger his propositions, and that is the mastermind principle at work. Thanks

Yes many mind but each must be unique, many points of view help. its just an idea maybe i should have found a more philosophical group to engage, what you stated above is fair and i don't think you would accept that sometimes it happens in reverse, i have no fixed idea im totally flexible and adjustable, but i fear at your level of intellect you may be transfixed by the math, we as a species have to be very careful in assuming anything absolutely. Many concrete, bulletproof theory's have been dis-proven when the the technology had caught up. The truth is we simply do not know. but i put it out this out there just in case. Just for the record i wasted a whole 5 hours on this thought not 20 years that's silly. There was a time when if you said the world was round you would be ridiculed, im not sure if physiologically we have come very far from that point. Please remember the most intelligent thing a man/woman can say is i don't know. and that is the ultimate truth. and please do not assume i am alone, my advantage here is i ignore nothing. Thanks. my objective is complete. The essence of string theory is that the smallest, most fundamental objects in the universe are not little balls knocking around like billiards, as had been thought for about 2,000 years. Instead, these small objects are supermicroscopic filaments—like tiny strands of spaghetti—whose different vibrational modes produce the multitude of particles that are observed in the laboratory. So when a string vibrates in one way, it might appear to be an electron. If it vibrates in a different manner, it would look like a quark. It could vibrate in a third way and display the properties of a photon. Or perhaps it vibrates in a fourth mode and physicists say, "That's a graviton!" This gives strings an inherent ability to unify phenomena that had always been assumed to be different. If string theory ultimately proves correct, then strings are truly the DNA of reality.

No nothing to do with religion i assure you, Its a brain thing, the MM principle is complex you will have to do some research if you want grasp it, i assure you it is used and proven by some of the finest thinkers, im not including myself in that description, no hubris here. I'm just trying to contribute sorry to upset. Thanks. Maybe only corporations use the MM Principle, I'm surprised you don't know of it its Decades old and a proven way to solve complex problems, it requires many minds.

Well im not trying to convince you of anything, but ill accept your assumptions, i understand human nature more than quantum physics. Yes ill find that for you and get back, although that is not my intention. Google "The mastermind Principle" when you understand that you will understand all this. Thanks.

Your right there would be no point as the 2 are functioning at a completely different quantum levels, so each will have radically different mechanisms, that i would expect, you point out many of them thanks. Although they have the same purpose, and are probably unique in that purpose, are there any other anythings besides a computer program with this purpose in the universe. Thanks.

Thanks for the concise answer, but i don't agree a string or a string of DNA is a set of instructions that has the purpose and authority to define the host particle or body, i fail to see what a pencil has in common, its a little more than just long things. Forget shape or mass im not saying they have that in common its the purpose that is same. grapefruit and brains also have no common purpose again that's just common shape. so can we get away from shapes and focus on addressing the overall purpose. Thanks Also can anyone tell me if there is anything else that has a this purpose within its host, hopefully that will eliminate pencils from the debate?.