Dubstepforum.com

bright maroon wrote:If the entire universe is composed of circles or spheres, then the shortest distance between two points can never be a straight line..

ive always wondered... can atoms get any smaller? and whats smaller then whats smaller then an atom, and then whats smaller then that? THATS ALWAYS INTRIGUED ME

smaller than an atom is the parts of the atom: electrons, protons, neutrons

smaller than that is quarks

the smallest scale we have to measure the subatomic universe is the planck scale

string theory supposes that everything is made up of even tinier vibrating strings, which utilize up to 11 dimensions of space to fold in different ways to create our reality.

ozols, you should track down and watch What the Bleep Do We Know?: Down the Rabbit Hole Extended Edition

Parson wrote:smaller than an atom is the parts of the atom: electrons, protons, neutrons

smaller than that is quarks

the smallest scale we have to measure the subatomic universe is the planck scale

string theory supposes that everything is made up of even tinier vibrating strings, which utilize up to 11 dimensions of space to fold in different ways to create our reality.

i thought dark matter was what made everything inc all of the above?

dark matter would be composed of subatomic particles like neutrinos or axions

strings are on a smaller scale

also,

ALEKS ZEN wrote: LOL ITS SO TRUE BUDDHA IS A SUCKA!

"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things as a meaningful unity"
- Albert Einstein

buddha is a badaman

edgar cayce's subscription to gnosticism is pretty much a combination of christianity with buddhism, saying that Jesus was a reincarnation of The Word made flesh.

edit: some other incarnations include horus, thoth, enoch, hermes, mercury

Parson wrote:ozols, you should track down and watch What the Bleep Do We Know?: Down the Rabbit Hole Extended Edition

is that miss Marlee Matlin? I'm going to put this in my Netflix queue

ok, bringing this one back. It's definately been on my mind.. alot! I'm uncomfortable with alot of it still. Simulation argument aside.. thinking about the super-intelligence theory that may explain the complexities of our universe, how does this truly differ from 'intelligent design' or just the simple explanation of a divine being?

I was discussing this heatedly with a friend earlier who studied philosophy at degree level and she was adamant that the argument of the cosmological constant being evidence of some design was nothing new and adds no more than arguments that hijack evolution as evidence of the same. From my own studies I know that the 'watchmaker' argument was definately refuted ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker ... er_Analogy ) and does not seem substantial enough to constitute a definitive conclusion in favour of design. How is the cosmological constant any different. I'm not arguing one way or another, in fact the more i learn and live the more unsure i am. It's a headfuck! This is why i am wary of people/theories that claim to have definitive answers.

Also, this doesn't jibe with something else i read on here a while back which i found very interesting. Hopefuly someone will remember what i'm on about cos i've searched and not found it. Basically it was along the lines that scientist have discovered some discrepancy between our bodies performing an action, and our brains being aware of it. Or something. The gist of it was that it called into question the nature of self-determination cos it implied that we actually do things before our brains are aware of it, lending credence to the theory that the world is one giant clockwork mechanism, with all eventualities predetermined. Now, I hate that idea... and further it doesn't tessellate with the concept of a designed universe: i mean, whats the point in designing an elaborate universal system that has a predetermined outcome? Even for an unobservable, unknowable superintelligence that is pretty fucked up.

This has been a well interesting thread, i'm glad it's here.

And @ Badger to answer the following...

badger wrote:really interesting stuff guys. will read up more into those links when i've got the time

Ikarai wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octavia_Bu ... .27s_Brood

has there been a film along those lines? remember hearing a tune (can't for the life of me remember what) where there's a vocal sample about a race of super-beings coming back to earth, and i'm sure it was something like the Oankali

as far as I know there has never been a film based on the xenogenesis trilogy. In the books it is never indicated that the Oankali are returning to earth, rather they have come from a seperate evolution to offer a genetic trade to the human race, recombining our dna with theirs to advance themselves and save our species from extinction in a post-apocalyptic world.

What the bleep is a recruiting advertorial for Ramtha, the 35,000-year-old Atlantis god.

Basically it was along the lines that scientist have discovered some discrepancy between our bodies performing an action, and our brains being aware of it.

Libets half second delay ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet

Exo genesis ? = Panspermia anyone ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

Ikarai: Not going to quote you cos i can't be bothered editing out everything except the relevant quote, but...

You said that the idea of the universe as being one big clockwork mechanism with no freedom of choice disturbs you, i have kind of come to terms with the idea that "free will" is a bit of an illusion, i will try to explain this belief if anyone is vaguely interested:

If i, hypothetically don't treat the matter that makes up the human brain, and therefore consciousness as any different from any other matter, and assume that consciousness is merely the result of the arrangements of neurons and concentrations of certain hormones and neurotransmitters in the brain, then every "decision" we make is subject to how matter interacts.

This, to me leads to a chain of cause and effect reaching back to the big bang, where you can say the exact and specific laws of physics for this universe were defined. Any tiny change to that initial moment would result in anything from drastic changes to tiny, seemingly insignificant changes, such as a certain neural pathway telling you to buy a coke rather than a sprite or something equally insignificant.

BUT, as far as i am concerned all this is purely academic, and ultimately useless, as you have to act like people have free will in order to go about your daily life, and in order for society to even vaguely function.

Let me know if any of that makes sense

spicerack, thanks for that: i've been searching up and down for that info. Very unnerving, and interesting.

and @ Slim, yes mate that makes perfect sense; I have often thought that way.. but like many people i'm sure, something about it does not sit right with me. I think at the root of it, is that consciousness - although it may be, as you say, a mere culmination of electrochemical processes occuring in the brain matter - is not understood by science even to the extent of a satisfactory definition.

As the product of something that defies our current understanding, i would like to believe that there is more to human perception and experience than the by product of a set of physical laws determined at the outset of the universe.

i'm gonna turn in now.. let the stateside crew tackle this til tomorrow. keep it goin!

Parson wrote:also,

ALEKS ZEN wrote: LOL ITS SO TRUE BUDDHA IS A SUCKA!

"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things as a meaningful unity"
- Albert Einstein

yeh i suppose the buddha was right in one way but MY BELIEF is that u must follow ur own beliefs and allign them with god every time u may have a problem. for me it means i can live a "normal" integrated life, dj, get pissed etc as long as it is done righteously and not out of fear of lack.

the only reason i said buddha was a sucka was cos the geezer tried starving himself, supposedly "sat under for a tree for 30 days" although i think thats all metaphorical...

in my eyes u got to study the ways of others to find ur "own way" and u can start ur "own way" once u REALISE god and the LAW of the universe

intresting couple of ideas

the evidence of our bodys acting before our 'brain' knows about it does not suggest a lack of 'free will', it indicates that we should consider the human body as a complete, that our brain is not seperate from the rest of our body, that our conciousness is part and parcle of the rest of us. This is to say the body thinks as a whole, I believe it controls itself, at times it forgoes letting us abjectly consider an action, for example drawing our hand away if we place it on a hot-hob. This is not to say we act like a mechanism in a clock because we draw our hand away before considering it, It instead means that our body forgoes that part of the process beacause it is necessary and the burn is a priority.

What I am trying to say (and making a bit of a hash at it) is that I feel we need to stop seperating and segregating diffrent aspects of ourselves, the concious mind, the sub concious mind, the materialistic body, the spiritual soul these are all one and the same thing, they are not parts of a whole but a single uniform whole.

Ikarai wrote:.

Also, this doesn't jibe with something else i read on here a while back which i found very interesting. Hopefuly someone will remember what i'm on about cos i've searched and not found it. Basically it was along the lines that scientist have discovered some discrepancy between our bodies performing an action, and our brains being aware of it. Or something. The gist of it was that it called into question the nature of self-determination cos it implied that we actually do things before our brains are aware of it, lending credence to the theory that the world is one giant clockwork mechanism, with all eventualities predetermined. Now, I hate that idea... and further it doesn't tessellate with the concept of a designed universe: i mean, whats the point in designing an elaborate universal system that has a predetermined outcome? Even for an unobservable, unknowable superintelligence that is pretty fucked up.

Was it this?

ikeaboy wrote:

Shonky wrote:

ikeaboy wrote:We experience reality half a second after it occurs. Which means we act half a second before we have decided to do the action and our brains fool us into thinking everthing is nice and sequential. This is observable from brain scans (apparantly, i don't own one) and it freaks the shit out of me

Why, I think it's cool.

It feaks me out because it fucks up free will and moves things towards the Dawkins cosmic fluke explaination of life, which i don't like at all, not that I'm religious.

It could have helped me avoid hitting that old lady the other day, wasn't driving just randomly striking complete strangers

One of the things that sticks in my throat after reading The God Delusion was his possible explanation for the exsistance of life. Basically Dawkins reckons the universe is so incredibly vast that, odds are, any event, no matter how unlikely, will eventually occur. Hence life. the implication of this logic are that anything that can be imagined must exsist somewhere including the flying spagetti monster he uses to illustrate a ridiculous belief system and including god or gods. DAFT.

I'm looking for an excellent illustration of the lack of free will in people by G.I. Gurdieff who believed that free will was attainable but was more difficult to aquire then "a million pounds through honest work" and this was in the 1920's. He maintains that people do not "do" anything, rather things are done through them. People are machines programmed by external events which influence them in that instant or programme them with predjudices, pre-dispositions, attitudes and all sorts of baggage. He maintains that man is not a singular being but plural, made up of many many smaller I's which take control at different stages and remain mostly unaware of each other unless difficult acute self observation is maintained. he maintains there is no life after death for the majority as the majority do not experience life before death. instead there is a constant sustained sleep wandering from one situation to the next ruled by indifferent external forces. The solution is to develop true Will, which is extremely difficult because first one must confront what he calls "the terror of the situation"-facing up to ones reality stripped from all the delusions that maintain our idea of self, this is extremely uncomfortable work that can take a lifetime and still be unsuccessfull. I am not making any claims for myself in this department and I don't recommend it for everyone. His estimation of the last century in term of mans development is that it is "an empty and abortive interlude".

Ah i found it. Please allow for the fact this was addresesd to wealthy folk 80 years ago.

You have plenty of money, luxurious conditions of existence, and universal esteem and respect. At the head of your well-established concerns are people absolutely reliable and devoted to you; in a word, your life is a bed of roses.

You dispose of your time as you please, you are a patron of the arts, you settle world questions over a cup of coffee, and you are even interested in the development of the latent spiritual forces of man. You are not unfamiliar with the needs of the spirit, and are well-versed in philosophical matters. You are well-educated and widely read. Having a great deal of learning on all kinds of questions, you are reputed to be a clever man, being at home in a variety of fields. You are a model of culture.

All who know you regard you as a man of great will, and most of them even attribute all your advantages to the results of the manifestation of this "will" of yours. In short, from every point of view, you are fully deserving of imitation, and a man to be envied.

In the morning, you wake up under the impression of some oppressive dream. Your slightly depressed state, that dispersed on awakening, has nevertheless left its mark. There is a certain languidness and hesitancy in your movements. You go to the mirror and comb your hair and carelessly drop the brush; you have only just picked it up, when you drop it again. You then pick it up with a shade of impatience, and, in consequence, you drop it a third time; you try to catch it as it is falling, but ... from an unlucky blow of your hand, the brush makes for the mirror; in vain you rush to save it, crack! ... there is a star of cracks on that antique mirror of which you were so proud.

Damn! Devil take it! And you experience a need to vent your fresh annoyance on some one or other, and not finding the newspaper beside your morning coffee, the servant having forgotten to put it there, the cup of your patience overflows and you decide you cannot stand the fellow any longer in the house.

It is now time for you to go out. The weather being pleasant, and not having far to go, you decide to walk. Behind you glides your new automobile of the latest model. The bright sunshine somewhat calms you, and a crowd which has collected at the corner attracts your attention. You go nearer, and in the middle of the crowd you see a man lying unconscious on the pavement. A policeman, surrounded by the, as they are called, "idlers" who have collected, puts the man into an ambulance to take him to the hospital.

Thanks merely to the likeness, which has just struck you, of the face of the ambulance driver and the face of the drunkard you bumped into last year when you were returning somewhat tipsy yourself from a rowdy birthday party, you notice that the accident on the street-corner is unaccountably connected in your associations with a meringue you ate at that party. Ah, what a meringue that was! And that servant of yours, forgetting your newspaper today, spoiled your morning coffee. Why not make up for it at once?

Here is a fashionable cafe where you sometimes go with your friends. But why did you even recall the servant? Had you not almost entirely forgotten the morning's annoyances? And now ... how very good this meringue tastes with the coffee!

Look! There are two ladies at the next table. What a charming blonde! You hear her whispering to her companion, glancing at you, "Now he is the sort of man I like!"

Do you deny that from these words about you, accidentally overheard and perhaps intentionally said aloud, the whole of you, as is said, "inwardly rejoices"? Suppose at this moment you were asked whether it had been worthwhile getting fussed and losing your temper over the morning's annoyances, you would of course answer in the negative and promise yourself that nothing of the kind should ever occur again. Need you be told how your mood was transformed while you were making the acquaintance of the blonde in whom you were interested and who was interested in you, and its state during all the time you spent with her?

You return home humming some tune, and even the sight of the broken mirror only elicits a smile from you. But how about the business on which you had gone out this morning .... You only just remember it. Damn ... well, you can telephone. You go to the phone and the secretary connects you with the wrong extension. You call again, but get the same number. Some man informs you that you are bothering him; you tell him it is not your fault, and what with one word and another, you learn to your surprise that you are a scoundrel and an idiot and that if you call him again ... then ...

A rug slipping under your feet provokes a storm of indignation, and you should hear the tone of voice in which you rebuke the servant who is handing you a letter. At least the letter is from a man you esteem and whose good opinion you value highly. The letter's contents are so flattering to you, that as you read, your irritation gradually passes and changes to the "pleasant embarrassment" of a man listening to a eulogy of himself. You finish reading the letter in the happiest of moods.

I could continue this picture of your day -- you free man! Perhaps you think I am overdrawing? No, it is a photographically exact snapshot from nature.

-- excerpted from Beelzebubs Tales to his Grandson, by G I Gurdjieff

Shit. I promise never to post anything that long again. Anyway eh tits are great arn't they....

ikeaboy wrote:Shit. I promise never to post anything that long again. Anyway eh tits are great arn't they....

i did read it & it was interesting