We're not so clever after all.

[blike]

This isn't really scientific, just something that crossed my mind.

 

When was the last time you thought of something truly original?

 

I've come to the conclusion that everything every idea either exists in nature, or is a synthesis hybrid of previous ideas. There are no original ideas.

 

For example, think of something that you've never seen or heard about. I see a giant purple space meatball. Sounds original, but its not. I've seen a giant, I've seen purple, I've seen things floating in space, and I've seen meatballs.

 

Perhaps we're not so clever after all, we're just good synthesizers.

[PogoC7]

You are putting originallity into object form. You've seen things in space, you've seen purple. Thats fine, but have you seen a man stick his own head in his ass. No, but just because you haven't seen it dosn't make it original. Someone else has seen it. Me.

Original is a thought. A purple giant meatball in space is original. Like Clive Barker and his movies. Hellraiser is a great original movie. Or example of originallity can be found at Clive Barkers site; in his paintings. http://www.clivebarker.com/html/visions/gallery/gall.html

crazy shit.

[Skye]

Even your idea isn't original, someone has already said "there's nothing new under the sun."

 

But assuming that giant purple space meatballs haven't been thought of before it is an original idea. A location doesn't have to be defined by the route taken to get there. If only it were marketable then it might be worth patenting.

[Piccolo]

Original happens everyday. Everything I do is original because only I can control my body. Original is today bacause their will never be another january 29, 2003.

[fafalone]

Well there might be if one of the newer ideas in cosmology turns out to be true, that the universe exists in cycles that last trillions of years; and if cycles are symetric.. well then everything might turn out the same each cycle.

[PogoC7]

The Big Bang. Is that the beggining of a cycle.

If so, isn't the energy released random.

There might be another earth, but in the same location? With the same type of carbon beings.

[fafalone]

What is random? Give us day-to-day example of a random process.

[PogoC7]

Now we are introducing "God" to this disscusion.

A man drops a penny from a plane. The penny is falling towards a city (Vatican). The pope is struck in the head and killed.

Was the death ramdom, or did "God" mean for that to happen. *Much respect for the Pope*.

It is intresting and the universe is so mysterious that I can't even grasp the idea of what ramdom can be. In todays world it seems that ramdom happens everyday. We conclude as the human race that someone or something is in control somewhat. I just hope my time leads to happiness.

[fafalone]

This has nothing to do with God.

 

The penny does not fall randomly.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by fafalone

This has nothing to do with God.

 

The penny does not fall randomly.

 

It fell unpredictably, which is empirically the same.

 

ps THERE YOU GO, BRINGING GOD INTO IT AGAIN.

 

(good old Dawkins)

[PogoC7]

So your saying nothing is random.

Pollen from a flower is airborn and it fertilizes another 10 miles away. That pollen grain somehow had a projection toward the other flower. I understand why the penny could be considered not random, but if thing don't happen just becuase; then why do they happen?

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by PogoC7

So your saying nothing is random.

Pollen from a flower is airborn and it fertilizes another 10 miles away. That pollen grain somehow had a projection toward the other flower. I understand why the penny could be considered not random, but if thing don't happen just becuase; then why do they happen?

 

Before anyone says anything else, Laplacian Determinism has been long dead.

[blike]

Let me rephrase this because i think i'm being misunderstood.

 

No idea is completely original; merely a compilation of things we have already seen or heard of.

 

Describing to someone something they've never seen or heard of would be like describing color to a life-long blind man.

 

For example, imagine describing a computer to a person who has spent their lives living in a remote jungle, and has never seen anything but his remote village.

 

No matter how much time you spent describing it to them, they would still have to relate it to something they have seen.

 

Now, imagine describing a computer to someone from the early 50s. They would have a much easier time understanding the concepts of a computer because they could assimilate various things they have seen [plastic, machinery, wires, etc] to compile themselves a mental image of a computer.

 

------------------

 

We cannot think of anything that can't be broken down into things we have observed.

[JaKiri]

Your point being?

[fafalone]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

 

It fell unpredictably, which is empirically the same.

 

Just because we don't have the ability (yet) to account for every factor, doesn't mean that we couldn't. It IS predictable, there's just more factors than we can currently account for.

 

Turing patterns come to mind, which have elucidated patterns in the movements of living organisms that otherwise appeared to be random.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by fafalone

Just because we don't have the ability (yet) to account for every factor, doesn't mean that we couldn't. It IS predictable, there's just more factors than we can currently account for.

 

The chances of us being able to is rather slim, Quantum Physics notwithstanding.

[fafalone]

Well it depends on the environment.

 

If you set up an experiment in deep space and exerted the exact same force vector on the penny in the exact same location, it's movement would be exactly the same.

 

Quantum probability is a whole other ballpark, although I don't see it having an effect in this instance.

[PogoC7]

Originally posted by blike

Let me rephrase this because i think i'm being misunderstood.

 

I see were your coming from. Originallity is relitive.

If aliens landed on Earth and showed us how they convert their energy masses into light and travle trought space. That would be original. Too us.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by fafalone

Well it depends on the environment.

 

The environment is the one in the original question, with the penny and the pope.

 

And remember folks, I said EMPIRICALLY.

[fafalone]

There's a finite number of forces that will act on it; if all the of these were taken into account, we could predict with extremely high probability, the point that the penny would land. Granted that now the task would be extremely inpractical and probably impossible with technology levels, but theoretically it's not random.

[blike]

Your point being?

 

Meh, really no point. Just that we havn't really invented anything completely new.

[fafalone]

When Galileo realized that all objects fall at the same rate regardless of mass, I'd say that was original. It was in opposition to what everyone had viewed, and they couldn't conceive of it before he demonstrated it.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by fafalone

There's a finite number of forces that will act on it; if all the of these were taken into account, we could predict with extremely high probability, the point that the penny would land. Granted that now the task would be extremely inpractical and probably impossible with technology levels, but theoretically it's not random.

 

I said EMPIRICALLY random.

[Radical Edward]

MrL.... I'm going to create a super hero, model it on you, and call it EmpiricalMan

[Giles]

Originally posted by blike

You're plagarising Locke's simple and complex ideas.

 

Anyway, you could argue that the particular combination is original.

 

excepting quantum theory, randomness and probability are ideas based on limited knowledge anyway.