1
Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can You Define What a Woman Is ?
« on: Today at 12:23:10 »
A female human.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
General Science / Re: Are Black Holes The Blackest Things Ever ?
« on: Today at 02:39:42 »
Apparently, the current record-holder for blackest materials (as of 2019) is a forest of carbon nanotubes grown on aluminium, claimed to absorb 99.995% of incoming light.
- Ultrablack materials are very useful in construction of telescopes, as they reduce those annoying lines radiating from bright stars, and other optical defects.
See: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/back-black-new-blackest-material/
But black holes are far blacker: Despite the accretion disk of a black hole getting hot enough to emit X-Rays, the event horizon of a solar-mass black hole has an effective surface temperature of around 60 nanoKelvins, due to Hawking radiation.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Overview
- Ultrablack materials are very useful in construction of telescopes, as they reduce those annoying lines radiating from bright stars, and other optical defects.
See: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/back-black-new-blackest-material/
But black holes are far blacker: Despite the accretion disk of a black hole getting hot enough to emit X-Rays, the event horizon of a solar-mass black hole has an effective surface temperature of around 60 nanoKelvins, due to Hawking radiation.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Overview
The following users thanked this post: neilep
3
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Why does The Sun's Polarity Change Every 11 years and Earth's is so unreliable ?
« on: Today at 02:28:59 »
A magnetic field is generated by the movement of conductive fluids inside the Earth and the Sun.
- In the case of the Earth, this is liquid iron/nickel alloy in the outer core
- For the Sun, it is Hydrogen/Helium plasma in the core
- Laboratory studies have used liquid sodium, and produced magnetic field reversals on timescales that are feasible in a laboratory experiment (ie much less than years)
- As you could imagine, there is a very different viscosity and inertia (and temperature) between these different fluids
- So it is not surprising that magnetic field reversals happen on very different timescales in these different environments.
Fluid flow is often a chaotic process, as we see with the Earth's magnetic field, and laboratory studies.
- The Sun's magnetic field is not exactly a model of regularity, since sunspots virtually disappeared for 70 years during the Maunder minimum (ironically, this started not long after Galileo brought them to the attention of European scientists - the Chines had been studying them for centuries).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
- In the case of the Earth, this is liquid iron/nickel alloy in the outer core
- For the Sun, it is Hydrogen/Helium plasma in the core
- Laboratory studies have used liquid sodium, and produced magnetic field reversals on timescales that are feasible in a laboratory experiment (ie much less than years)
- As you could imagine, there is a very different viscosity and inertia (and temperature) between these different fluids
- So it is not surprising that magnetic field reversals happen on very different timescales in these different environments.
Fluid flow is often a chaotic process, as we see with the Earth's magnetic field, and laboratory studies.
- The Sun's magnetic field is not exactly a model of regularity, since sunspots virtually disappeared for 70 years during the Maunder minimum (ironically, this started not long after Galileo brought them to the attention of European scientists - the Chines had been studying them for centuries).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
The following users thanked this post: neilep
5
Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can JUST a head survive ?
« on: Yesterday at 19:57:00 »
No obvious reason why not, but whilst an elementary textbook might show any organ merely devouring glucose and oxygen (science), the details of the plumbing and chemistry are very complicated (engineering - or biology, if you prefer).
Old Irish story: Traveller arrives in Dublin and asks the way to Cork. Bloke says "If I was going to Cork, I wouldn't start from Dublin". So here's the sales engineer's response:
The simplest and cheapest way of keeping a head alive is to leave it attached to the original body, which can process common foods and ambient air into whatever the brain needs. Our standard product runs on fish, chips and mushy peas, washed down with beer. Runs for about 80 years with minimum maintenance, and if you get a complementary pair, they will make another one - complete with head - automatically.
Old Irish story: Traveller arrives in Dublin and asks the way to Cork. Bloke says "If I was going to Cork, I wouldn't start from Dublin". So here's the sales engineer's response:
The simplest and cheapest way of keeping a head alive is to leave it attached to the original body, which can process common foods and ambient air into whatever the brain needs. Our standard product runs on fish, chips and mushy peas, washed down with beer. Runs for about 80 years with minimum maintenance, and if you get a complementary pair, they will make another one - complete with head - automatically.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
6
Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can JUST a head survive ?
« on: Yesterday at 19:56:35 »Could my head(or anybody else's head) remain alive and well if attached to the appropriate equipmentThe technology may not be currently up to the task, but since your body constitutes 'appropriate equipment', the answer is very much yes. All it has to do is what the rest of you does.
You could always attach the head to a different host like the other end of the neighbor sheep producing a sort of 'push me pull ewe'.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
7
General Science / Re: Are Black Holes The Blackest Things Ever ?
« on: Yesterday at 15:55:29 »They're not perfectly black, but they're blacker than a place in space with no stars in it.Why is the one in the middle winking at us?
The black sheep don't quite win, but close.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
8
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Does The Universe Spin ?
« on: Yesterday at 15:32:53 »
Everything spins, but the universe isn't a thing. An object without a bounded size cannot meaningfully spin.
Ewe spin me right round quickly,
tight round, getting dizzy,
ralph a one pound ground round mound
Ewe spin me right round quickly,
tight round, getting dizzy,
ralph a one pound ground round mound
Spin in relation to what?Spin is absolute, and need not be in relation to any particular frame, although something's angular momentum is at least relative to an axis, but angular moment and spin (RPM say) are different things.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
9
General Science / Re: Are Black Holes The Blackest Things Ever ?
« on: Yesterday at 15:28:22 »
They're not perfectly black, but they're blacker than a place in space with no stars in it.
The black sheep don't quite win, but close.
The black sheep don't quite win, but close.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
10
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Does The Universe Spin ?
« on: Yesterday at 14:57:54 »
Spin in relation to what? A spin is usually observed from some static frame of reference. Maybe it is spinning and this causes the observed expansion but there is no way to determine this without said frame of reference which by definition does not exist.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
11
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can A Gravitational Wave Cause Physical Damage ?
« on: Yesterday at 13:43:20 »Can Gravitational waves Cause Physical Harm ? say, they were mega strong ? What am I going to feel as they pass through me ? Will I puke sheepy sick ?It affects large things before small sheepish size things. At a moderate distance, Earth would definitely feel it, being stretched this way and that, causing earthquakes and volcanoes and such. But if one was close enough to a source of such gravitational wave energy, the tidal forces of the masses involved would already be tearing Earth apart in a similar way via tidal forces, even in the complete absence of the thing putting out gravitational waves.
So point is, try to keep the sheepy pasture reasonably far away from really massive objects.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
12
Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution / Re: Can A Cuttlefish Act As A Video display ?
« on: 02/04/2022 16:03:26 »
I think he already is one. Like his squiddity relatives, he can put on a video of his background for camouflage, put on a scary show for what's considering him for lunch, or maybe a sexy vid to get the ladies (like he needs that... already cute enough to want anybody to cuddle a cuttlefish). Only trick left is to pick up the wifi so he can stream netflix or something.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
13
The Environment / Re: Does Earth Lose Water ?
« on: 06/11/2021 20:09:03 »Quote from: Origin
I know this isn't very nice, but I have to ask, why is it that in all of your posts you talk like an idiot?When you take the viewpoint of an "outsider" (in this case, a sheep), you can point out humorous aspects of things that we all take for granted (or, perhaps in this case, for granite).
The following users thanked this post: neilep
14
The Environment / Re: Does Earth Lose Water ?
« on: 06/11/2021 19:08:58 »I know this isn't very nice, but I have to ask, why is it that in all of your posts you talk like an idiot?Because he's a sheep.
(and sheep are allowed to ask silly questions)
The following users thanked this post: neilep
15
The Environment / Re: Does Earth Lose Water ?
« on: 06/11/2021 14:13:54 »
New research from the Center for Earth Evolution and Dynamics at the University of Oslo (Norway) shows that our planet's deep water cycle is clearly unbalanced: the earth is always "eating away" a little water, hide them deep inside the planet and never return them to the earth. This has to push the earth to millions of years of extreme dehydration.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
16
New Theories / Puppypower's assertions on brains
« on: 15/09/2021 13:45:22 »
The brain has software, hardware and firmware. Placing a probe in the hardware of the brain will not give you all the needed information to determine choice and determinism. The analogy is placing a probe inside a computer's hardware, while various software is running. What is going to happen depends on the software.There is more going on in the brain than what the hardware does. Consciousness is closer to software, albeit assisted by hardware via firmware.
For example, pain level is not an easy thing for doctors to determine in terms of their patients. This causes problems in terms of prescribing drugs for pain. Pain can be different in different people under the same circumstances. It can also be faked by some for free drugs.
A probe into hardware of the body, where the pain appears to originate, cannot tell us pain level. The nuance of pain level requires the consciousness of the patient, telling the doctor what they feel, from the inside. Consciousness is like a probe to the software. There is inside data being generated in the brain that cannot be seen from the outside. This data is real, but the doctor cannot always verify it from the outside. The philosophy of science breaks down when it comes to consciousness, since third person data alone is not complete.
Say you were a scientist, who has volunteered to be brain hardware probed, to see where in the brain and body the pain is centered. The other scientists in this study, will follow the philosophy of science and look at your brain hardware response, in the third person, detached from any pain. You as the test subject will be inflected with various types of pain; drill a tooth. You as the test subject will get to experience pain from the inside your own body. Your job is to relate the software and firmware extrapolations, on your mind and body, in the first person.
You may see lots of data processing occurring from the direction of nerve pulses to memories of the past. If the pain is too severe, you may not be able remain fully objective and do you job. This is why doctors are not allowed to operate on themselves. It is different from the inside. The first person data is not the same as the third person data and can impact the focus of consciousness since consciousness may have to process too much data.
There is more going besides what the third person science hardware probe will see. However, inside data; first hand software and firmware data, is not exactly reproducible. In the case of pain, different test subjects will see it differently. This data is objective to each person but it is subjective as a group; both objective and subjective. However, this type of data is also needed to make the analysis complete, even though this first hand firmware and software data does not fully obey the philosophy of science. There is no machine or fellow human who can verify you and reproduce your exact results. Hardware science of the brain is half baked at best, and should be understood as only part of the data needed to fully define the phenomena of consciousness. Third hand data approach of science is good for looking at a rock, since a rock does not think.
The two centers of consciousness may not be easily seen with only a hardware approach. These are not localized affects, but are wired throughout the brain to allow the integrated affects that we attribute to consciousness; firmware. However, they do appear to come to a focus at the level of firmware and software. This inference requires inside data from the first person since software is not the same as hardware, and needs a software approach to see it.
If I was to guess, the inner self would be wired into the center of the brain; thalamus region. The thalamus is the most wired part of the brain. It is the central switching station and it merges input and output from all parts of the brain. Making use of the most wired part of the brain would make most sense in terms of natural selection; inner self consciousness. This would allow the inner self to have its finger in all pies; firmware on top of hardware.
The ego center appears to be more located in the cerebral matter. The inner self is firmware while the learned knowledge of the ego, implies that the ego is partial firmware but also software based. Both centers can be active and integrated at the same time, via input and output loops from the thalamus. With the thalamus as the central switching station, software command lines from the ego; walk, will go to the thalamus, where long term natural wiring patterns allow the body to integrate the walk, with little ego support needed, besides steering.
For example, pain level is not an easy thing for doctors to determine in terms of their patients. This causes problems in terms of prescribing drugs for pain. Pain can be different in different people under the same circumstances. It can also be faked by some for free drugs.
A probe into hardware of the body, where the pain appears to originate, cannot tell us pain level. The nuance of pain level requires the consciousness of the patient, telling the doctor what they feel, from the inside. Consciousness is like a probe to the software. There is inside data being generated in the brain that cannot be seen from the outside. This data is real, but the doctor cannot always verify it from the outside. The philosophy of science breaks down when it comes to consciousness, since third person data alone is not complete.
Say you were a scientist, who has volunteered to be brain hardware probed, to see where in the brain and body the pain is centered. The other scientists in this study, will follow the philosophy of science and look at your brain hardware response, in the third person, detached from any pain. You as the test subject will be inflected with various types of pain; drill a tooth. You as the test subject will get to experience pain from the inside your own body. Your job is to relate the software and firmware extrapolations, on your mind and body, in the first person.
You may see lots of data processing occurring from the direction of nerve pulses to memories of the past. If the pain is too severe, you may not be able remain fully objective and do you job. This is why doctors are not allowed to operate on themselves. It is different from the inside. The first person data is not the same as the third person data and can impact the focus of consciousness since consciousness may have to process too much data.
There is more going besides what the third person science hardware probe will see. However, inside data; first hand software and firmware data, is not exactly reproducible. In the case of pain, different test subjects will see it differently. This data is objective to each person but it is subjective as a group; both objective and subjective. However, this type of data is also needed to make the analysis complete, even though this first hand firmware and software data does not fully obey the philosophy of science. There is no machine or fellow human who can verify you and reproduce your exact results. Hardware science of the brain is half baked at best, and should be understood as only part of the data needed to fully define the phenomena of consciousness. Third hand data approach of science is good for looking at a rock, since a rock does not think.
The two centers of consciousness may not be easily seen with only a hardware approach. These are not localized affects, but are wired throughout the brain to allow the integrated affects that we attribute to consciousness; firmware. However, they do appear to come to a focus at the level of firmware and software. This inference requires inside data from the first person since software is not the same as hardware, and needs a software approach to see it.
If I was to guess, the inner self would be wired into the center of the brain; thalamus region. The thalamus is the most wired part of the brain. It is the central switching station and it merges input and output from all parts of the brain. Making use of the most wired part of the brain would make most sense in terms of natural selection; inner self consciousness. This would allow the inner self to have its finger in all pies; firmware on top of hardware.
The ego center appears to be more located in the cerebral matter. The inner self is firmware while the learned knowledge of the ego, implies that the ego is partial firmware but also software based. Both centers can be active and integrated at the same time, via input and output loops from the thalamus. With the thalamus as the central switching station, software command lines from the ego; walk, will go to the thalamus, where long term natural wiring patterns allow the body to integrate the walk, with little ego support needed, besides steering.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
17
New Theories / Re: Does Free-Will Exist ? (Lightweight topic......... lol)
« on: 10/09/2021 17:05:58 »They timed signals accordingly.If this is actually what they reported, then it sounds like the signal they're labelling the 'decision signal' is actually some kind of reaction and not the making of the decision at all. They need to move their probe to the actual place where the decision is made, or make it sensitive to whatever changes when you go from undecided to decided.
1) When a Decision is Made.(mind)
2) When it is Acted upon.(body)
Those fellas found body signals & movement coming in first, and the decision signal later.
They concluded, Action superseded Decision.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
18
New Theories / Re: Does Free-Will Exist ? (Lightweight topic......... lol)
« on: 10/09/2021 16:00:03 »
I read this in some neuroscience article waay back.
Some researchers were tryin to map, record n catch n time signals within the brain.
It was sumthin to do with alpha, gamma n such spikes.
Well, all i remember...
They timed signals accordingly.
1) When a Decision is Made.(mind)
2) When it is Acted upon.(body)
Those fellas found body signals & movement coming in first, and the decision signal later.
They concluded, Action superseded Decision.
Weird Right!
Ps - i might have read it wrong, or misunderstood or all logic must have been lost in translation & time lapse.
Sorry.
✌️
Some researchers were tryin to map, record n catch n time signals within the brain.
It was sumthin to do with alpha, gamma n such spikes.
Well, all i remember...
They timed signals accordingly.
1) When a Decision is Made.(mind)
2) When it is Acted upon.(body)
Those fellas found body signals & movement coming in first, and the decision signal later.
They concluded, Action superseded Decision.
Weird Right!
Ps - i might have read it wrong, or misunderstood or all logic must have been lost in translation & time lapse.
Sorry.
✌️
The following users thanked this post: neilep
20
New Theories / Re: Does Free-Will Exist ? (Lightweight topic......... lol)
« on: 09/09/2021 22:06:42 »
Hi everyone.
For whatever it's worth, it seems Halc is covering the topic adequately.
Many people would suggest that "Free Will" does exist - but it may not be what you thought it was.
So you can "choose" to keep your eyes open but it doesn't matter, you can't make it happen. There is some "back-of-house programming" that will take over.
However, I shouldn't worry about it. You can "choose" that tomorrow will be a nice sunny day but you can't make that happen either. We don't assume that the weather was anything we should have had some control over. Our inability to choose the weather does not cause us to think we don't have free will. So, the autonomic closing of your eyelids and 99% of everything your body does can easily be put in the same category.
So, we can see that "Free Will" already means less than we might have hoped for. There isn't much that we actually have conscious control over.
Best Wishes.
Late editing: Hi evan_au, if you had got your post up earlier I would have included you in my reply. Anyway, it seems sensible.
For whatever it's worth, it seems Halc is covering the topic adequately.
Many people would suggest that "Free Will" does exist - but it may not be what you thought it was.
I guess my definition of free will is my making choices based on my own way of making them. Completely independent of any subconscious , back-of-house programming that I do not have control of.You already have some direct experience of this. You cannot keep your eyes open when an object (like someones finger) is coming toward your eyes. There's an autonomic response that will close your eyelids.
So you can "choose" to keep your eyes open but it doesn't matter, you can't make it happen. There is some "back-of-house programming" that will take over.
However, I shouldn't worry about it. You can "choose" that tomorrow will be a nice sunny day but you can't make that happen either. We don't assume that the weather was anything we should have had some control over. Our inability to choose the weather does not cause us to think we don't have free will. So, the autonomic closing of your eyelids and 99% of everything your body does can easily be put in the same category.
So, we can see that "Free Will" already means less than we might have hoped for. There isn't much that we actually have conscious control over.
Best Wishes.
Late editing: Hi evan_au, if you had got your post up earlier I would have included you in my reply. Anyway, it seems sensible.
The following users thanked this post: neilep