Stevo

So the "soul" you speak of would be a knew from of energy. Like heat or plasma. This energy doesn't really deplete though, or need anything to feed off of (wood to make fire=heat and light). I guess it does do work, (if you count envoking thought). So it meats some of the requirements of energy. Hmmmmmm interesting theory though.

As far as a definition for awareness. I'm talking about the ability to detect, and respond to stimuli, meaning dreams count as they produce stimuli. But is there not even a single theory out there on how a lump of nervous tissue that has a some electricity running throuhg it can in and of itself know about the fact that it is attached to a body and it is effecting the environment around it by telling the body what to do and how to do it. I was just wondering if anyone had any theories, even far-feached ones, on how that could happen. Then, if any of those theories could be in any way backed up scientifically.

This may sound stupid, but mathmatically speaking wouldn't it be an infinitely impossibility for there to be a finite amount of matter in a universe that goes on forever. There would eventually (in theory) have to be something else. Those edges would just be our universes edges, right?

Pepsi is my staff of life.

How do i know that i am me? How do you know you are you? Why and how am i aware of my surroudings? I DO NOT want the typical christian response of, "Because that is the way God intended things to be." This is not a valid response in my opinion. Is there some kind of chemical explanation for awareness? Does it have to do with having a "soul" (for lack of a better term). If so where does that come from? I'm just looking for some answers.

half a quark

There is no way to make an infinitely small piece of matter. You could still make it smaller.

Not everything ends. Matter can always be divided into smaller portions. You can always make a more precise measurment. My girlfriend will never ever stop nagging me. Not everything has to end. Technically speaking it can't end can it?

If we can all agree on the fact that intelectually men and women are equal, would that establish males as being the superior gender? Men are on the whole more physacally able, and if we are saying that the two are mentally equal, men would be superior correct? I could be wrong... could be. I understand the whole, men are more succeptable to disease, shorter life expectancy, blah blah blah. Still, i'm pretty sure that would still put us a wee bit ahead. Sure hope the girlfriend doesn't read this one.

Firstly, i'm not saying we can do it very well yet. Our machinery to detect impulses is all there, that's how the brain works, i just dont think that we can make very good sense of the signals we detect yet. Hence the difference in these experiments is very minute. Second, our brains are most advanced so it is logical that we would be able to send and recieve impulses the best. A mouses brain is smaller. Less imulses, less ability to detect them, less ability to interperet them. assuming its even possible at all.

I think they are both equal in their mental capacities. But which is more succeptable to static or noise in their environment. (In communication noise inhibits message). The one who is more succeptable to the "noise" wouldn't have as good of a chance at getting the information right, or being distracted while trying to reason or think or whatever "inteligent" task they were performing. But their actual intelligence would still be the same right? Only their ability to exercise it would be different. This whole concept of static would make it really hard to test who was actually more intelligent.

I have heard of studies like this. My theory is that it could be due to the nature of our brains function. Brain functions are nothing more than a series of electrical impulses right. What if some of that electricity escaped the cranium out into the environment. Other brains in the area could detect the electricity and translate that, with practice and luck. It is kind of a long shot. But it might be possible (emphasis on might) to teach the brain to interpret the tangent impulses. I remember reading something about how if the two subjects are related, like brothers, then the odds increase. And i'm pretty sure that ditance from the other subject was influential too. For statistical accuracy you would need a very large sample size to prove this, though. You would have a very strong correlation of data so you would need a lot of it to see any kind of trend. I doubt it would stand up to a standard z test. But it would be cool.

I'm saying it is a second and independant act. Willfull in its own right.

What if your time traveler goes back and explains how to time tavel to his younger self. Would this throw things off? Could you jumble yourself up in time, throwing rondom aged versions of yourself into the wrongs times? What about the theory that something would stop you from affecting free will. Traffic while you are trying to make it to tell your friend that he is about to eat cereal at 10:30. A freak explosion on your time machine. Maybe space and time would not allow you to meddle with something like free will. I know a little far-feached. One last idea. Doesn't the whole thing promote free will? In a sense you are re-enforcing free will by allowing a second chance to decide what to do. You found out that you were going to eat cereal at ten thirty, so you instead decide to have toast. The key word is decide. I think you would still get to decide.

Kids die from drowning, poeple will kill themselves with tylenol and vodka, husbands will beat, stab and strangle, wifes will poison and run over their husbands... Guns make it simpler. Guns have saved plenty of lives. Taken a lot too. They will continue to. But if you take guns away from citizens your going to throw off the balance. Besides, take away my gun, i'll carry a knife, take that away, i'll carry a club, then a bat, then a mace, then an axe, then a tire iron, then a pointy stick, then a rock, then a bow, then a class 4 laser. Neverending cycle.

I live in fresno and we have one a corn fild maze that from the sky looks like a bulldog. Not a simple one. It has a lot of detail. Letters, complex shapes. Its a maze for crying out loud. Regaurdless, if you can make a bulldog in a cornfield, you can make a circle or two... i know they are more complex than that but same concept. If we can build pyramids, dams and sky scrapers i think we can put some cool patterns in a field of crops. Must be MICROSOFT.

Could it simply be due to the fact that via repetition we hear our own vioce in our heads? The vioce you hear most often, with very little exception is your own, so you should logically be driven to use it when speaking "to yourself". Just think, when you speak in your head it sounds as your vioce does to you, not as it does to others. Record yourself and listen to your voice. It sounds different than how you percieve your own vioce. You speak in your head however you hear your voice not how it actually sounds. It's not some spiffy supernatural occurance. Just repetition.