An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Page 3 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 13 14 >
Topic Options
#4072 - 09/20/09 03:31 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: artie505]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Originally Posted By: artie505
Death is the only frontier that pretty near all of us will ever cross; I look forward to discovering what's really on the other side (as opposed to what I envision) but not too soon, mind you. grin
Perhaps you are aware of someone who won't die? shocked Isn't it odd that "true believers" also don't want to die too soon and fight it as much as possible? Logic would suggest that they would eagerly embrace meeting their deity.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4077 - 09/20/09 06:55 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
crarko Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Minnesota USA
Originally Posted By: jchuzi
Originally Posted By: artie505
Death is the only frontier that pretty near all of us will ever cross; I look forward to discovering what's really on the other side (as opposed to what I envision) but not too soon, mind you. grin
Perhaps you are aware of someone who won't die? shocked Isn't it odd that "true believers" also don't want to die too soon and fight it as much as possible? Logic would suggest that they would eagerly embrace meeting their deity.


Here ya go:

http://www.fantastic-voyage.net/

wink
_________________________
---

The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth. - Niels Bohr

Top
#4080 - 09/20/09 07:21 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: crarko]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Now that someone is offering a key to immortality, I think that I'll run the other way while holding tightly onto my wallet.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4081 - 09/20/09 08:39 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Hal Itosis]
alternaut Offline

Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
Life and love are supposed to remain mysterious wonders.
Believe anything you want.

I sure hope that won't be literally true in my universe, which is not to say there isn't any room for romantic obfuscation of reality. wink

Likewise, and despite all arguments to the contrary, beliefs are inherently irrational coping and comforting mechanisms (there's your 'benefit') generated by a brain lacking in understanding or means to deal with issues in a more active and fundamental way, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for that either. That is, as long as you remember what and where you are, and won't let beliefs dictate your options to the exclusion of everything else. But that's my 2¢... tongue
_________________________
alternaut moderator

Top
#4093 - 09/20/09 12:14 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: alternaut]
macnerd10 Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Nicely put! Scientists call it the working hypothesis and it is always tied to a certain area or problem (maybe except physics). Common folks tend to explain it by God's will. This makes us comfortable with the world, like a wall to keep our sanity behind it.
_________________________
Alex
3.1 GHz 13" MacBook Pro 2015, 8 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, TimeWarner Cable
2.8 GHz Xeon Mac Pro 2010, 16 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, LAN

Top
#4094 - 09/20/09 12:15 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
macnerd10 Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
+10!
_________________________
Alex
3.1 GHz 13" MacBook Pro 2015, 8 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, TimeWarner Cable
2.8 GHz Xeon Mac Pro 2010, 16 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, LAN

Top
#4100 - 09/20/09 01:10 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: macnerd10]
alternaut Offline

Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: macnerd10
Scientists call it the working hypothesis and it is always tied to a certain area or problem (maybe except physics). Common folks tend to explain it by God's will.

Of course, the difference between the two is that scientific working hypotheses (including those in physics) are continuously tested and rejected when the experimental data makes their continuation untenable, while God's will is usually neither tested nor rejected by the faithful who more often than not tend to frown upon such investigative activities.
_________________________
alternaut moderator

Top
#4101 - 09/20/09 02:51 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: alternaut]
macnerd10 Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Agree!
_________________________
Alex
3.1 GHz 13" MacBook Pro 2015, 8 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, TimeWarner Cable
2.8 GHz Xeon Mac Pro 2010, 16 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, LAN

Top
#4103 - 09/20/09 05:50 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: alternaut]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Originally Posted By: alternaut
Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
Life and love are supposed to remain mysterious wonders.
Believe anything you want.

I sure hope that won't be literally true in my universe,

...meaning what? It currently is true? (guess i missed something).


Originally Posted By: alternaut
which is not to say there isn't any room for romantic obfuscation of reality. wink

Again, "reality" (and i suppose you mean *physical* reality?) is phenomena perceived by our 5 senses. Explain (if you will) dreams. [i.e., the dimensions therein are *not* limited by the physical world we live in day-to-day. For example, even the atoms and molecules everyone is all excited about here are somewhat illusory. Theoretically, there is more space in these solids (such as our Macs) than we are capable of seeing with our eyes. I don't know about the rest of you... but i fly and time-travel in my dreams all the time. Not that i have full control or anything. (still trying to get through Victor Sanchez's book on Castaneda).] Anyway, Einstein blew away many conceptions of (Newtonian) reality when he proved that {the passage of} time is *not* a constant. The maximum speed of light.... that's the constant.



Originally Posted By: alternaut
Likewise, and despite all arguments to the contrary, beliefs are inherently irrational coping and comforting mechanisms (there's your 'benefit') generated by a brain lacking in understanding or means to deal with issues in a more active and fundamental way, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for that either.

Yes, there is some 'comfort mechanism' involved perhaps. But... "a brain lacking in understanding or means to deal with issues" is a trait all humans share, so that cancels out. [unless you have all the answers to life... or even the right questions? -- if so, Dr. Venter could probably use your help. wink  ]



Originally Posted By: alternaut
That is, as long as you remember what and where you are, and won't let beliefs dictate your options to the exclusion of everything else. But that's my 2¢... tongue

None of which truly answers such questions as: 'where did we come from?' and 'where are we going?'. Are you saying that you believe before we were born we came from nowhere... and when we die we will go nowhere. [?] If so... that's none too comforting.



Originally Posted By: macnerd10
Nicely put! Scientists call it the working hypothesis and it is always tied to a certain area or problem (maybe except physics). Common folks tend to explain it by God's will. This makes us comfortable with the world, like a wall to keep our sanity behind it.

Common folks are more interested in watching Survivor or Sopranos (besides getting food and sex of course), than thinking about such deep subjects.

Which reminds me of some burning questions:
Is there TV in heaven?
Cable or dish?
How many channels?
grin

Top
#4105 - 09/20/09 07:48 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Hal Itosis]
alternaut Offline

Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Obviously, I cannot answer many of the questions you ask, but that doesn't mean I have to resort to [deluding myself by] inventing irrational answers. I can wait and am perfectly happy in the expectation that the scientific method used so far to elucidate reality is quite capable of continuing to do so, whether this happens in my lifetime or not. But it's equally clear that 'virtual' realities as experienced in dreams don't need to meet the strictures of reality as perceived by (y)our waking senses.

You can easily imagine assembling both real and unreal items into immaterial model constructs, and it is a small step to do so whether one is aware of the imaginary or unreal aspects of certain components or not. And while that hard to pinpoint awareness might be qualified as illusory (not that this train of thought requires such a thing), the more readily described matter is arguably a different case*. What is illusory there is the notion that one should be able to perceive all dimensions of matter within the limits of one's unaided senses. If you have no problem transporting yourself beyond your own limitations with the aid of machines, why wouldn't that apply to your perceptions as well?

I must also disagree with your notion that "a brain lacking in understanding or means to deal with issues is a trait all humans share, so that [it] cancels out". I'm sure you can see more than one flaw in that interpretation, and this even applies to (and despite) those missing answers or questions you're referring to, just as I'm sure Dr. Venter is already sufficiently aware of this not to require my help. grin This is no zero sum game, to the contrary.

Likewise, I don't need to believe anything beyond what I can already encompass about my life: my 'self' reached critical mass and emerged during my physical development, just as it will cease to exist upon my death or perhaps even before that. It doesn't bother me one bit if you'd call that 'coming from nowhere and returning to nowhere', because that's how it appears to me; I have no problem whatsoever with that view and don't require a comforting illusion purporting something else. Besides, my personal fate is separate from that of humanity as a whole, and speculation about the details is as 'real' to all of us as it is immaterial to the actual course of events of such things.

*) We both can easily observe the differences between the effect of such mental exercises on reality, as opposed to that of direct interventions based on previous experimentation and associated expectation. But once again, these are only a few more coins from my opinion purse. Meanwhile, I'll let your final questions stew for a bit longer... tongue
_________________________
alternaut moderator

Top
#4109 - 09/20/09 09:48 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: alternaut]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Originally Posted By: alternaut
Obviously, I cannot answer many of the questions you ask, but that doesn't mean I have to resort to [deluding myself by] inventing irrational answers.

π
is an irrational number... yet you (we) have no problem accepting that in order to compute its full value, one must go towards infinity for eternity? Is that rational? wink


Originally Posted By: alternaut
I can wait and am perfectly happy in the expectation that the scientific method used so far to elucidate reality is quite capable of continuing to do so, whether this happens in my lifetime or not.

Seems you share that faith with tacit. That must be a source of comfort [as opposed to "irrational" self-delusion] i suppose? wink


[Your second paragraph blew me away... so (despite my not understanding it fully) i think i'll agree with you there.]


Originally Posted By: alternaut
I must also disagree with your notion that "a brain lacking in understanding or means to deal with issues is a trait all humans share, so that [it] cancels out". I'm sure you can see more than one flaw in that interpretation, and this even applies to (and despite) those missing answers or questions you're referring to,

But... you (we) can't just take out those questions (or any others of that nature), because therein lies the very reason we all share that trait: none of us *knows* the answers to these [before and after type] questions. We may speculate in different ways... or choose to ignore the matter entirely. But basically, we're all just babes in the woods here. [edit: and i guess one other big question is "why?" -- isn't there some famous quote concerning the 'unexamined life'?]


Originally Posted By: alternaut
Likewise, I don't need to believe anything beyond what I can already encompass about my life: my 'self' reached critical mass and emerged during my physical development, just as it will cease to exist upon my death or perhaps even before that. It doesn't bother me one bit if you'd call that 'coming from nowhere and returning to nowhere', because that's how it appears to me; I have no problem whatsoever with that view and don't require a comforting illusion purporting something else. Besides, my personal fate is separate from that of humanity as a whole, and speculation about the details is as 'real' to all of us as it is immaterial to the actual course of events of such things.

All good, no problem whatsoever. So... we're right back to my "believe what you want" then -- aren't we? [you keep using words like "view" and "expectation", but that's pretty much the same as a belief system... whether you approve of that term or not.]

As i hope i made clear... i don't claim to be right (about anything here), or say that you're wrong. Just exchanging ideas.

[and i enjoy it when folks like Jon and Artie make jokes... this topic needs comic relief. smile ]

Top
#4112 - 09/20/09 11:53 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Hal Itosis]
macnerd10 Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
No good links for TV in heaven but some claims that Internet is not needed in heaven:
http://www.raptureready.com/faq/faq361.html
_________________________
Alex
3.1 GHz 13" MacBook Pro 2015, 8 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, TimeWarner Cable
2.8 GHz Xeon Mac Pro 2010, 16 GB RAM, OS 10.11.2, Office 2011, LAN

Top
#4115 - 09/21/09 12:47 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
> Quoting artie: "Death is the only frontier that pretty near all of us will ever cross; [....]"

Quoting Jon: "Perhaps you are aware of someone who won't die?"


I haven't run across any of those, but I'm aware of many people who will cross frontiers before before they die.

> Isn't it odd that "true believers" also don't want to die too soon and fight it as much as possible? Logic would suggest that they would eagerly embrace meeting their deity.

Did people always fight death as they do today, or is today's (American, anyhow) attitude that nobody should ever die a new thing?

My feeling is that death was pretty much universally accepted until the "Medical Industrial Complex" decided that inventing new medications and appliances to keep people inhaling and exhaling longer was preferable. frown mad
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

Top
#4118 - 09/21/09 02:49 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Hal Itosis]
roger Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Vermont
Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis

[and i enjoy it when folks like Jon and Artie make jokes... this topic needs comic relief. smile ]


French toast?
_________________________
MacBook 2.4 Ghz · 4 Gb ram · 10.7.5
stuff I'm interested in
iPhone 4s 7.0.2

Top
#4120 - 09/21/09 03:46 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Hal Itosis]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
and i enjoy it when folks like Jon and Artie make jokes... this topic needs comic relief.
Fear of death, like fear of anything else, is mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4121 - 09/21/09 03:54 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: artie505]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Originally Posted By: artie505
Did people always fight death as they do today, or is today's (American, anyhow) attitude that nobody should ever die a new thing?
I think that people always fought death. Having a strong survival instinct is definitely a Darwinian trait. In other words, organisms (I'm not limiting this to humans) that don't go out of their way to survive tend not to contribute to the gene pool. Male black widow spiders are (nominally) exceptions, of course, but the point is that they manage to reproduce before they go to The Great Web In The Sky.

I agree that Americans somehow think that death is an abnormality and can be avoided if one takes the right vitamins, exercises, and otherwise lives via the health fad du jour. There seems to be an attitude that, if a patient dies, the doctor must be incompetent. We don't even see people die; that's relegated to hospitals and nursing homes.

There's a great line in Woody Allen's Sleeper. His character awakens 200 years in the future and is informed that all his friends are dead. He is incredulous and exclaims, "But the all ate organic rice!"

My wife's father died at home at age 90, with his loved ones surrounding him. To my mind, that beats the hell out of passing on while tubes of various diameters are inserted in every available orifice. Dying is inevitable but some methods are better than others.


Edited by jchuzi (09/21/09 05:47 AM)
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4124 - 09/21/09 05:39 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
Gregg Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Originally Posted By: jchuzi
Isn't it odd that "true believers" also don't want to die too soon and fight it as much as possible? Logic would suggest that they would eagerly embrace meeting their deity.


No, it's not odd. That's because it has nothing to do with logic. Most people I have discussed death with say if not for those left behind, they would gladly "retire". Since most of us know how much it hurts us to lose a loved one, we don't want our loved ones to suffer that pain from our unexpected or early demise. And then there's the "don't want to miss out" angle; not seeing your grandkids grow up, etc.

Top
#4131 - 09/21/09 08:49 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: ryck]
sandbox Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Water World
Artificial flowers cannot die for life within them is illusion.

Top
#4141 - 09/21/09 11:44 AM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Gregg]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Originally Posted By: Gregg
Since most of us know how much it hurts us to lose a loved one, we don't want our loved ones to suffer that pain from our unexpected or early demise.
If you have complete faith, there should be no pain involved in the death of a loved one because you "know" that that person is in Heaven. In fact, I would think that you would be overjoyed because of the deceased's complete bliss and the "knowledge" that you will see that person again.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4146 - 09/21/09 01:15 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
Gregg Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
I disagree. The loved ones left behind are still, uh, living. For however long that lasts, they will miss the departed. It's similar to someone going on a trip. I'm reminded of a newlywed couple I know. Before they got married, one of them went overseas. They missed each other terribly, even though they knew they would soon be reunited, and could still talk to one another. You got two of the emotions involved in your last sentence. You missed one.

And if it is complete faith you're discussing, the quote marks around knowledge are unnecessary. wink

Top
#4149 - 09/21/09 01:29 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Gregg]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Originally Posted By: Gregg
That's because it has nothing to do with logic.
I should have remembered that.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4153 - 09/21/09 02:37 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
Gregg Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
So, you've had feelings/emotions in the past? Where have they gone?

You cannot apply logic exclusively in a discussion of death. The use of sarcasm detracts from the heretofore presumed seriousness of your dialog. Should it continue, I will bow out.

Top
#4155 - 09/21/09 03:00 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Gregg]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Gregg,

You misunderstand me. I was not being sarcastic and I don't understand why you thought so (and also am very surprised at your reaction). I was trying to state some inconsistencies, nothing more.

I assure you that my feelings and emotions are as deep as anyone else's and they haven't gone anyplace. It might be better to state that emotions and logic seem to occupy different areas of the brain and are not easy (or even possible) to reconcile. Without going into detail, I have had experience dealing with profound, clinical depression that I knew was illogical but that illogicality made no difference to the emotional state; you can't argue with emotions. So, it's no surprise that faith and logic are not necessarily compatible.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.2, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#4156 - 09/21/09 03:50 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: jchuzi]
Gregg Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Originally Posted By: jchuzi
I was trying to state some inconsistencies, nothing more.


Alright, sorry if I jumped to a conclusion based on your cryptic post. Either I missed something, or you have not clearly pointed out the inconsistencies to which you refer.

Top
#4165 - 09/21/09 06:32 PM Re: Unexplained Scientific Principles [Re: Hal Itosis]
tacit Offline


Registered: 08/03/09
Loc: Portland, Oregon, USA
Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
But i still have doubts (unless they borrow a little bacteria... or caviar... or something with an inner "life" force) that scientists will be able to develop any 'creatures'. I.e., using only jars of elements and energy transference, etc.


So basically, you ARE saying that there is a magical, mystical essence to life, something that goes beyond the physical laws of the universe.

Why do you believe that?

Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
And -- unless i'm mistaken -- Einstein made many a reference to God as well.


Indeed he did. But Einstein did not believe in any personally involved god the way most religious people do; he did not believe in a god who involves himself in the lives of humans, nor one who suspends the physical laws of the universe for the convenience of humans.

And even Einstein's limited view of god still blinded him from some physical truths of the physical world; he refused to accept quantum physics on religious grounds--and those principles and models he refused to believe have been tested and found to be accurate.

Einstein spent the last fifteen years of his life as a living monument to himself, contributing nothing to physics, because his religion caused him to refuse to accept the reality of how the universe works.

This is one of the greatest problems of faith-based belief systems.

Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
Also, he didn't seek to cook up artificial 'organisms' (synthetic bacteria?) with the [alleged] attitude that "there's nothing magical about life."


One of the things I find most fascinating about religious faith is the notion that there is no awe and majesty in the universe without magic.

There is nothing magical about life; life exists by, and follows, physical law. But that does not mean that it is not awe-inspiring. You do not need leprechauns, fairy dust, or invisible men with magic powers who live in the sky in order to be awestruck by the magnificence and incredible wonder of the physical world.

In fact, I think that relying on magic detracts from the awe and wonder of the world, because it says "all this is here because someone waved a magic wand and made it be here"--far less awe-inspiring, in my book, than "of the trillions and trillions of ways this universe could have turned out, the way it did turn out is with such beauty and majesty as to beggar human comprehension, and we are here to witness it."

We are the universe's way of understanding itself. That, to me, is far more awe-inspiring than we are the corrupt creations of a magical man in the sky.

Originally Posted By: Hal Itosis
Again, "reality" (and i suppose you mean *physical* reality?) is phenomena perceived by our 5 senses. Explain (if you will) dreams. [i.e., the dimensions therein are *not* limited by the physical world we live in day-to-day.


They're not dimensions; they're the result of activity in your brain, nothing more. If I stop the activity in your brain--for example, with an anaesthetic drug--I stop those dreams.
_________________________
Photo gallery, all about me, and more: www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Top
Page 3 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 13 14 >

Moderator:  alternaut, cyn