geordief

Do I sound like an extreme monist? And you would be a mainstream monist ,perhaps? I am only slightly familiar with these concepts https://www3.nd.edu/~maritain/jmc/etext/psych023.htm#:~:text=Dualism teaches that Mind and,one and the same Reality. but ,from the link there seem to be quite a few variations... I think I would be attracted to what you say is not the case I think consciousnesss could be extensive in the same way as a particle extends into its field according to QFT. (of course I am waffling)

I think more along the lines that your consciousness is those experiences. There is nothing "hands off" about what I think of as consciousness.It is entirely immersive , athough there is an illusion of an "internal observer". which is just a facet of our consciousness.

You are thinking of a coma? So if you have an experience where "nothing could be better" (as in the oft quoted line"it was bliss that day to be alive" ) and this is followed by the depths of despair (perhaps as a result of a medical condition) your consciousness does not follow any direction? In the former experience all your days lie ahead of you in anticipation and in the later there is no tomorrow. Is your consciousness diminished or altered?

So ,if we lose a hair off our head we loose (just change?) a bit of our consciousness(as well as when there is a change in the environment such as the sun going behind a cloud)? Can we increase or decrease our amount of consciousness or is it just redirected/reoriented? Do emotions affect our consciousness?

Can we bottle (or just create) spacetime curvature and thereby create (or annihilate) mass? That might be a causal relationship.

I assumed they would be thinned at an earlyish stage(no idea how they develop after that) Here is their website https://www.facebook.com/KBtreegang/ There is not much specificity regarding the aims of the project,but increasing local bio diversity seems to figure as one of the main aims and the fast rate of initial growth attracted the attention of the national broadcaster,I guess. Yes I have read that some plants are able to attack the roots of competitors chemically.I am forever weeding the scutch from my strawbs for that reason but without noticeable benefit.

That's true ,it was a female saleswoman. The logic breaks down there.

It was strange when I went to the Vodafone shop this week with the intention of buying a new phone and ,except for really expensive models there was nothing they could offer me under 6 inches. Looking online ,I had no more luck I am pretty surprised that these large sizes are what people seem to want .. Yes I think IPhones seem to be available in smaller sizes than eg Samsung.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/0308/1436684-trees-climate/ "The Tiny Forest concept was pioneered by a Japanese botanist, Akira Miyawaki. He pioneered a special method of planting and ground preparation that can be used to grow forests ten times faster than a typical forest (which usually takes 200 to 300 years" "Usually up to five saplings are planted for every square metre and as a result, the trees are forced to grow upwards for sunlight instead of spreading outwards"

It is difficult to get a small one.I got this by going to a reconditioned phone website. It is 2017 and a 4 inch screen. There was an awful problem getting a battery for it ,though (the battery it came with was on its last legs) as they don't ship them in aircraft any more and I had to visit phone stores around town to look for old batteries from broken phones. I prefer these smaller screens for convenience even though they are no doubt harder to read.

The universe?

Not when I search. They don't batter embryos in Alabama?(a bit deadpan)

Woody Allen might need some kind of a disclaimer before screenings of his "All you Wanted to Know about Sex but were Afraid to Ask." "No human beings were massacred or demeaned in the making of this movie"

@Genady Don't worry.I generally /often just quote content rather than the particular poster. Feel free to jump in .

If the vacuum is filled with quantum foam (a big "if" ,as I don't understand what that means) could an object's speed/velocity be referred to different locations in that quantum foam? Does the term "location" not apply ,perhaps wrt quantum foam? Said in another way ,could the quantum foam be considered to be a medium?

Seems a lot but the prosecution's case was that it was representative of the profit he made on his misrepresentations. I think he should be fined extra just for being who he is. We should give him the witch hunt he claims he is getting. (Has he claimed Brit Ekland was begging for it yet?)

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68221243 "Three students have won a $700,000 prize after using AI to read a 2,000-year-old scroll burnt during the Mount Vesuvius eruption in 79AD." This is a great story .A few years back there was talk as to whether these (or similar scrolls) would be legible and now there seems a lot of optimism because of new technology available .

I normally go around wearing wellies and a Barbour Jacket (but only drive a small Toyota Yaris ) The man at the shop checkout did point out that it was a cool outfit.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68196828 The price went up a bit. Parking in Paris for so called non resident ambulato-mechanical onanists has now tripled.

Do you think Susskind was giving a pop-sci explanation? Would that not be frowned upon in the formal setting of what I assumed was a lecture (at Stanford ,I think)? I think in this case he did preface his remarks by saying most would disagree.

I looked at the Susskind video.He seems to be saying that adjacent regions of space contain particles (virtual particles,was it?) that are entangled. So the property of space being entangled (if I understood the lecture) was its property of containing entangled particles close to either side of a line dividing it.(not just at the event horizon of a BH but generally) And I think Susskind did refer to this as "space being entangled" I found that extraordinary and I think perhaps most physicists may disagree with that (Susskind's caveat) but ,if that is accepted then he goes on to say that that might violate " entanglement monogamy"

You have to be specific. Until you do I say that this is incorrect.

Not sure what you mean.Our brains have no choice but to extrapolate from past data to create a "virtual present" and a likely future. Our brain processes are not instant and that is how we and every entity ,a;live or non-sentient live. It is "freedom within boundaries" . As the expression goes ,time is what stops everything happening at the same time.(or words to that effect) edit "“Time is what prevents everything from happening at once.” John Archibald Wheeler https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/30075.John_Archibald_Wheeler

As the "time slices" of the brain become theoretically smaller (approach zero) the amount of energy required to process data approaches infinity (=impossibility)Our brains can observe the world for the very reason that we cannot do that(grasp the "present")

We all make mistakes and hopefully learn from those mistakes. We cannot know everything and have to apply our resources to those things that we can most accurately know and which are likely to be most beneficial or of most consequence. If something is unclear to us we can investigate further and it may become clearer.