Curdis wrote:I would really need to do the reading (want to pay me?).
Gee, no, I could pay you for stripping and shaking your butt but not for reading up on physics!
Here's where I must say I have no clear understanding of what you are understanding
I later realised that the first issue 'how many dimensions can the human mind comprehend simultaneously' is actually more in your field and us theoretical physicists should probably butt out.
My question is much more trivial than you believe. It's my lack of explanation skills that confuse you.
What the human mind is able to conceptualise in uninteresting, that's my field. My question is if these 10 or 11 dimensions are something the human sensory systems can percept. To make a stupid analogy from my field:
We both know that the human mind can concieve, concepualise, objects that do not have a material represenation in the objective reality. We can imagine a unicorn, but it doesn't mean this concept corresponds to an actual object in the objective world that humans can percept by their senses.
So, let's go to Sigmund Freud, the father of psychodynamics who contributed more to art that to science. Freud created the concept of psychosexual phases. Everybody has heard about the oral, anal and oedipal stage, and each stage is connected to a whole bunch of consequent concepts like the topographic model (id, ego and superego), the 12 defense mechanisms etc. Now,
this is a model of the human mind. It can be used to interpret observation and it can be used as a "working model" or operational model of the psyche. But it does not correspond to anything we can observe empirically, it does not describe a "hidden" dimension of reality that is actually there but we cannot percept it because our senses are limited or something like that. It is a model, and observations can be interpreted according to this model, but the model itself is not an object that can be percepted.
Ok, just like feminism is bound to meet postmodernistic relativism, the mythical "unused brain capacity" is bound to meet QM. The idea this guy has is that the human brain has a lot of unused capacity and when we decrease conscious, aware thought process for instance during meditation, the unused capacity can be released and maybe then,
*fanfare*, this released capacity can be used to
percept (not perceive, not understand - percept by sensory perception) these 10 dimensions.
So what I believed I understood was that these 10 dimensions are not something that could be expected to be
percepted by human sensory systems, it's a theoretical model.
Do you understand now what I thought I understand and do you think my understanding was the answer to my trivial question?
How could you ask a vegetarian such a thing!:speech: :mischief:
I am terribly sorry, I forgot!
Here, take this consolation electrical carrot instead
* The ragged cleric moans loudly and attempts to pull his head free of the sticky rug, but decides that lying quietly dying is a much better deal *
The ragged nematode moans too, wondering why people believe they are genious because they put together two complex things they don't understand.
Next question: The human brain must have a special module to detect
change. Any change. Not within a specific sensory system, but
change in general. This follows from Zenon's arrow paradox.
Don't ask me how this pseudo-paradox is relevant for neurophysiology, the guy is seriously convinced he is genious and has figured out something great If we could find out how this special module works, we could use it in AI and get the Nobel prize. Comments?
*The ragged nematode picks up the near comatose ragged cleric and puts him in a garden cart and decides to bring him to the lonely island although he is smelling pretty bad.*