Appolinaria

I literally JUST read something about scientists creating matter particles from light like 10 years ago, or something. so a supernova releases radiation, releasing photons & matter can be created... right?

Is there a common feature of all observers? Like, can only something that consists of a type of particle, or being in a certain state, make an observer? also, what are neutrinos?

I never said you did either. I was just further supporting my argument that it's not OK to have sex with kids, even if they could.... which is what your disturbing facts above imply. I'm almost positive you wouldn't suggest that. I wasn't trying to say you were

Moontanman, to respond to you with the whole infant being aroused thing... I still think society's morals should be greater than anything nature seems to imply. The human body is imperfect. We have vestigial organs. Just because a child CAN have sex, or can show signs of arousal, does NOT mean they should be having sex with anyone. Take a random example of Pica. It's an urge to eat non-food (sometimes hazardous) items. It's often brought on by the physical change of pregnancy. So if a physical change explains the urge, it does not mean that the urge should be followed through with... or plenty of pregnant women would be poisoned and die. Just as the physical change of arousal in a child should not mean they should follow through with the possible urge of sex. I like to think we are perfect beings, in imperfect bodies. As we evolve, we err away from our natural urges, and use logic to take the place of primitive tendencies. This is just my opinion.

I'm going to give my own opinion on society's views of sex.... I think the stereotypical parent's view on sex in childhood can lead our youth to suppress their first sexual urges & not be comfortable talking about it... they think sex is taboo. I think this leads to a sex-revolved society fueled by curiosity from innate urges that were suppressed. If sex is treated like any other bodily function, like eating, you separate it from your logical self. You say, "I am in a body that needs this." not, "I need this" People are too focused on sex these days. Instead of judging people for their thoughts, ideas, and characteristics that are separate from gender or any other type of physical attribute, they are blinded by superficial things.... I think by bringing a normal amount of attention on sex, you actually prevent an unhealthy focus on it.

Thanks for the response! I have some questions though Computers use the same logic as us, just on a less evolved scale. It still makes sense, therefore it's intelligent in some way. So if there is a machine whose intelligence differed from ours, it would be totally incomprehensible, right? What I'm trying to say is that intelligence isn't based on whatever we want- it's based on how well we perceive the universe and constant laws around us. So in order to even define anything as "intelligent" it would have to comprehend it's surroundings the same way as we do... which means it would not differ. If it does differ, it wouldn't be intelligent. We are just beings picking up on constant laws. If our race ceases to exist, the laws of our universe still will. If intelligence sprouted again, it would have to follow the same logic we did. So how could we call something that doesn't follow our logic, intelligent? Also, how can we model & create something more advanced than ourselves? How can our brain create a structure more complex than itself? Kind of reminds me of the omnipotence paradox a little bit. A thought that kind of terrifies me is this.... A computer uses it's preset functions to complete a specified task, like a standard calculator... it's kind of similar to memorization of reactions. As humans, we can memorize the logical approach to THOUSANDS of specified tasks. Our conscious is the ability to discern when to use the logic of the numerous tasks we have memorized. It seems like we're just one step beyond computers, and this is only because silicon technology is replaced with better materials. No magic involved. And while I'm here, talking to someone educated on these things, is there anything that's unique to the brain? Like a chemical? I was reading a strange christian-esoteric book that said a specific element was... and the amount of it was responsible for the level of intelligence. Lol.

Awesome... I have never heard of this experiment. It goes exactly with what I was trying to say. Thanks a lot for sharing! I guess the essential question is, Comparing a human's decision to a machine's (like in the Chinese Room experiment) where is the difference? Is the brain a high functioning machine we can't reconstruct with our technology right now, or is there an outside source that makes humans unique that we will NEVER be able to recreate?

Well, I think memorizing is different from understanding a concept. You can memorize the specifics of formulas, but if you don't grasp the concept of how it applies to other things, then it's just memorization. This doesn't really mean intelligence. Other species, like chimps, have outperformed us in memory tests. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7124156.stm So if chimps are better at some cognitive tasks like memorization, what signifies intelligence? Why is the human race still superior? I think that's where intelligence comes into play.

The idea of understanding consequence is relevant; children are physically inept at understanding consequence. The biological affects of smoking & drinking are very accessible to any adult. I can't even watch television without seeing anti-smoking ad's riddled with facts on it's biological effects.

Yes, but it's not child abuse when the children are . If you ever question the morality of a situation, I can give you the best advice.

@ Phi- Thank you so much! Ideally I would use a more pure source, but I'm a little lazy. http://www.childmole...s/research.html this is another source from a biased organization.. In the abel & harlow child molestation prevention study, it says that 88 percent of child sexual abuse victims are molested by people with pedophilia. I don't know how accurate their study is, but the author seems pretty legit. "Gene G. Abel, M.D. is a full professor of Psychiatry who has taught at several medical schools, including Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. Dr. Abel is currently affiliated with Emory University School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine. Dr. Abel, who has been a research scientist in the field of sexual violence for more than 30 years, is at the top of his field, both nationally and internationally. He is past President of the National Society for Behavioral Medicine, a Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, a diplomat of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, and a member of the International Academy of Sex Research. As full professor, he has been a research psychiatrist at the New York State Psychiatric Institute, has been on the faculty, and conducted research at several medical schools, including Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and Emory University Medical School. In addition, Dr. Abel has trained criminal justice personnel in Georgia, New York, California, Texas, Florida, Maine, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Alabama. He has also trained U.S. Navy and Air Force personnel to manage the sex offender populations in their brigs. Gene G. Abel, M.D. is the Director of the Behavioral Medicine Institute of Atlanta, the Founder and President of Abel Screening, Inc., in Atlanta, Georgia, and the Co-Founder of The Child Molestation Research & Prevention Institute. He has presented his research in the United States, China, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Venezuela, Sweden, Germany, Israel, and England. He has been awarded funding to conduct nine major studies. In addition to his work on cardiac control, sickle cell disease and diabetes, the National Institute of Mental Health has awarded him funding for six long-term studies to investigate sexual violence and to design new ways to stop it."

I have a question, according to that transactional interpretation theory, RIGHT at the beginning of the universe & time, would there only be future histories?

OK assuming that the Bible says that, without sickness & pain, would we attach too much to our physical existence? we would be in a constant state of euphoria.... and when death arrives, like a drunkard afraid to give up his booze, we would miss our body, the one we are GUARANTEED to lose with death. without work, without the struggle for food, would we have ANY self-worth? or would we be a useless piece of furniture decorating god's living room. without death, we would be confined to the limits of our universe, only capable of understanding time, space and physical existence... only capable of comprehending what we can see around us. I don't see anything perfect about that situation... the ability to refine ourselves is a gift, to perfect our flaws. not to merely exist as a subordinate creation. and on top of that, I love the rain =)

Ok I went on google. Here you go. "Adult retrospective studies show that 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men were sexually abused before the age of 18 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006). This means there are more than 42 million adult survivors of child sexual abuse in the U.S." "Nearly 70% of all reported sexual assaults (including assaults on adults) occur to children ages 17 and under" source is http://www.d2l.org/s...exual_Abuse.htm So yes, I would say that this proves we have a substantial number of pedos around us... I did my research, now find a statistic about white supremacist recruiting So now we have established that a large number of people have been sexually abused before the age of 18. here are the affects of that. Take this statistic for example- "Approximately 95% of teenage prostitutes have been sexually abused. Source: CCPCA, 1992." I'm sure you'll try telling me prostitution is not detrimental to society..... but trust me on this one it is. & I'm too lazy to look up more stuff. this is why the fear is so widespread. Because it has huge impacts on individuals & society. Now, if you try to support the argument of a curious child engaging in sexual acts with an adult willingly, I'll give you this. Children usually don't reach sexual maturity until 17. (http://www.nlm.nih.g...icle/001950.htm) Before that age, their reproductive systems haven't finished developing and they can't technically feel arousal. If they aren't aroused, then they are not really engaging in sex. The brain isn't going through the same thing that happens with sexual stimulation in adults. If they aren't aroused, sex can also be painful. Even if a child claims they wanted to have sex, EVEN if they are 17 and sexually mature, it still technically can't be consensual.... The prefrontal cortex in children isn't fully developed until as late as 25, which affects decision-making. http://www.hhs.gov/o...ex/index.html#3 So what I'm saying is sex involves changes in the body & in the brain... both of which children are incapable of experiencing until sexual maturity. & even if they matured early, it's still not consensual. Therefore, any sexual act with a child is sexual abuse. Leading to all of the major, damaging affects I listed above.

because there are a ton of pedos all around us. more of those than kkk members trying to recruit your kids. if there werent laws that could throw them in jail they wouldnt be scared of trying to seduce children. would you want a 45 year old creeper pursuing your 12 year old daughter?

ok, why wouldnt he want us to be able to discern between good & evil?

Michel, you are a genius... please keep supporting my dictatorship over this thread and I shall knight you.

hmm this is all very complicated for me. so, in the wheeler experiment, the present affects the past, resulting in the past then affecting the future? so they're all connected.. changing one, changes the other. but where do these past/future waves originate? how does the past have a physical state that can be altered? I need to read more about this to really grasp it.. it's way beyond me

Before I write my response to this, what exactly is "someone attentively watching a quantum system and collapsing it's wave function."? How is that possible? Through thought? Is that proven? Sorry, once again, oblivious to physics Well if it is, then in the Bohmian interpretation, wouldn't there need to be an observer to collapse the wave function in the big bang? Like a super conscious? There are about 500 words & concepts here that I need to look up, these 4 paragraphs have helped so much. Thanks for making it as simple as possible so I could attempt to understand it.

Thanks for the nice response. I think you're right. =)

Thank you so much for your responses.... and patience. I've asked you so many questions. I honestly don't even know the basics of physics, but if I understood the terms you used correctly, then I have a question. So, if there are a bunch of potential states, what makes a state occur as opposed to just being a possibility? If the other universes are just in a potential state, why is ours existing? Am I even defining these words properly, haha ...

but why punish us with death for wanting to be knowledgeable? that doesn't seem like the pursuit of anything wrong. I understand that the Bible says we must obey God, & that's why we were punished, but aside from that, what is the significance of it being the tree of knowledge? why not some other tree? that's my question.... god could have just said, hey don't eat from that random pear tree or you'll die, which would still be testing our obedience without specifying the tree's importance. but the bible specifically speaks about the tree of knowledge. is it because knowledge tempts us? if so, then why is it wrong?

jesus. what is this brilliant phenomena youve displayed before me! where im at, we have Fairway Market. theyre amazing. you can find everything. the most obscure things.

but why wouldnt god want us to eat from the tree of knowledge? wouldnt he want us to understand the knowledge he created? thats what doesnt make sense to me. i wouldve eaten it for sure.