GameBanshee Forums

80's music rocks!!!

C Elegans wrote:That's from the late 70's, and it's nothing compared to the musical geniouses who produced masterpieces such as "Careless whisper", "Girls Just Want To Have Fun" or "Like a virgin".

Bah! You guys don't know great 80's music when you hear one!

*sings "Burning Flame" by Vitamin Z*

"walking out tonight, in the streetlights I can see yooooouuuu... arm in arm with just another guyyyyyy..."

@DWah!: In my capable hands? Oh goody!!! *plans on "handling" the guests after his rendition of Burning Flame*

I thought someone switched off that karaoke machine? Why is there still singing going on around here? Now to sabotage it to make sure its really inoperable. *Proceeds to plant some sticky bombs on the said karaoke machine*

And now, to throw it outside before it detonates. *Proceeds on doing so, pressing the button on the detonator and watch the karaoke machine go up in flames* :laugh:

* The ragged cleric's highly tuned sin and depravity detector pings alarmingly as it is pointed in the direction of a certain overcoat. Taking a final swig on the now empty pint mug, he gets up on the second try and wobbles over. *

I definitly shaw shomtink *hic* move under there!

* Indicates the trench coat.*

o 0 ( Sin at last! And I feel strangley elated at it's discovery. Hmm why is it so blurry in this gods forsaken back hair sprinkled and sad souless music saturated heck hole?)

* Falls down *

@Sin-longing wannabe cleric who I am sure is secretly depraved and fools around with koalas: Somebody just asked me if I believe the brain can perceive the 10 or 11 dimension that quantum physics propose. Now I have no idea what 10 or 11 dimensions these are. Can you help me? My RL theoretical physicist friend lives in Austin, Texas nowadays and my RL particle physicist friend is on parental leave with 3 small kids . Oh, I wish I had a live-in theoricial physicist butler who could help me with all this stuff...and all of this is probably Penrose's fault...

C Elegans wrote:@Sin-longing wannabe cleric who I am sure is secretly depraved and fools around with koalas: Somebody just asked me if I believe the brain can perceive the 10 or 11 dimension that quantum physics propose. Now I have no idea what 10 or 11 dimensions these are. Can you help me? My RL theoretical physicist friend lives in Austin, Texas nowadays and my RL particle physicist friend is on parental leave with 3 small kids . Oh, I wish I had a live-in theoricial physicist butler who could help me with all this stuff...and all of this is probably Penrose's fault...

you mean with the help of something like this: Imagining the Tenth Dimension - A Book by Rob Bryanton
(pick the "imagining the ten dimensions" from the menu

C Elegans wrote:@Sin-longing wannabe cleric who I am sure is secretly depraved and fools around with koalas:

:speech:

C Elegans wrote:@Somebody just asked me if I believe the brain can perceive the 10 or 11 dimension that quantum physics propose. Now I have no idea what 10 or 11 dimensions these are. <SNIP>

As they asked what you believed you really don't need an external reference....

These additional dimension could be many things and among mathematicians and physicists there is a long standing 'debate' as to how many dimensions can be conceived (in a useful way). This encompasses such things as hypercubes et al. There is a broad concensus that most people struggle with five (the usual three, time, and an extension) and truely exceptional individuals can make meaningful 'geometrical' interpretations from perhaps as many as seven. This is irregardless of any quantum mechanical connections.

Fundamentally (Schrodinger's Equation) quantum mechanics is two dimensional. The addition of further variables to model particular aspects of particle dynamics can increase the 'phase space' to almost any number of dimensions. I have no problem in 'perceiving' these dimensions in any quantity. To place a physical model onto them in even a non-standard conception of euclidian geometry is actually pointless. The only conection between the two is a large scale equivalence principle that has no relevance at the small scale (which is where these additional 'dimensions' live).

Hope that wasn't too confusing.

It takes zero dimensional reasoning to equate 'Penrose' = 'fault'. Incidentally this is true for all values of both 'Penrose' and 'fault'

The drunk cleric stirs in his 'sleep', counting electric sheep. - Curdis ! PS The lack of my 'sig' on the last post was due entirely to the dramatic emphasis that this places to my state of drunkeness. It was not an error.

These additional dimension could be many things and among mathematicians and physicists there is a long standing 'debate' as to how many dimensions can be conceived (in a useful way). This encompasses such things as hypercubes et al. There is a broad concensus that most people struggle with five (the usual three, time, and an extension) and truely exceptional individuals can make meaningful 'geometrical' interpretations from perhaps as many as seven. This is irregardless of any quantum mechanical connections.

Fundamentally (Schrodinger's Equation) quantum mechanics is two dimensional. The addition of further variables to model particular aspects of particle dynamics can increase the 'phase space' to almost any number of dimensions. I have no problem in 'perceiving' these dimensions in any quantity. To place a physical model onto them in even a non-standard conception of euclidian geometry is actually pointless. The only conection between the two is a large scale equivalence principle that has no relevance at the small scale (which is where these additional 'dimensions' live).

Hope that wasn't too confusing.

It takes zero dimensional reasoning to equate 'Penrose' = 'fault'. Incidentally this is true for all values of both 'Penrose' and 'fault'

The drunk cleric stirs in his 'sleep', counting electric sheep. - Curdis ! PS The lack of my 'sig' on the last post was due entirely to the dramatic emphasis that this places to my state of drunkeness. It was not an error.[/QUOTE]

Either Im way out of my league here or its entirely too early in the morning for me to even make an attempt of trying to understand.

*proceeds to nuke yesterdays leftover coffee and add a shot of Baileys*

Mr Snow]you mean with the help of something like this: Imagining the Tenth Dimension - A Book by Rob Bryanton [/quote] I am not sure if this explanation is helpful or not wrote:As they asked what you believed you really don't need an external reference....

These additional dimension could be many things and among mathematicians and physicists there is a long standing 'debate' as to how many dimensions can be conceived (in a useful way).

The easy way out is of course just to say "I have no bloody idea" and this is what I should have said if I was asked this question in a scientific contex, however no scientists in my field would ask such far fetched questions. It's usually my technology-geek friends who asks questions of this type.

However, what I was wondering was in these dimensions are mathematical models to explain certain phenomena (like how a particle behaves) or if these dimensions are something that human sensory systems have evolved to percept. From your answer I draw the conclusions that it's the former.

It takes zero dimensional reasoning to equate 'Penrose' = 'fault'. Incidentally this is true for all values of both 'Penrose' and 'fault'

ROFLMAO!

PS Are electric sheep tasty with curry?

C Elegans wrote:I am not sure if this explanation is helpful or not, I think I need Curdis to assess that.

I'm not sure either. I've been out of the loop with my Undergraduate (B Sc.) speciality for over five years and that is a lifetime in QED, plasma and laser physics. I will take a punt and guess that this is a popularist book that attempts to place a physical model onto a pure math concept. Now this may have some stunning benefits or it may not. I would really need to do the reading (want to pay me?).

C Elegans wrote:However, what I was wondering was in these dimensions are mathematical models to explain certain phenomena (like how a particle behaves) or if these dimensions are something that human sensory systems have evolved to percept. From your answer I draw the conclusions that it's the former.

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. Based on purely anecdotal evidence bandied about the tutorial room I would suggest that even as skewed a sample of egotistic freaks that are astro/theoretical physicists would conceed defeat at actually being able to usefully process six dimensions (A restatement of my previous three plus time plus one extension being generally 'do able' - by a skewed sample of egotistic freaks) with some laying claim to outlandish abilities in conceiving ten or more. When tested on simple topological conclusions most then have to pull there heads into a much more beleiveable seven or eight.

My second conjecture, specific to QM, remains to be challenged and I seriously doubt that the book mentioned by Mr Snow sheds any light on this mathematical model (I skimmed the web site and when they used 'folded' twice I started to suspect that it was not truely useful, or I was completely missing the point).

C Elegans wrote:PS Are electric sheep tasty with curry?

How could you ask a vegetarian such a thing!:speech: :mischief:

* 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 * - Curdis !

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.*

Grizz wrote:Either Im way out of my league here or its entirely too early in the morning for me to even make an attempt of trying to understand.

*proceeds to nuke yesterdays leftover coffee and add a shot of Baileys*

Don't worry, it's absolutely not important, read a good book instead or go grope a pretty girl/guy I am just pestering Curdis with things that pester me, since my sadistic personality type needs to share the suffering.

The link I provided was mainly just for the little video on it under the "Imagining the Ten Dimensions" menu option.
Not really for the whole book itself....

As for the dimensions themselves, I'm no problem with the 1st 6, but the latter (7-10) start to stretch my brain.
I've also read a math book (not a school/text book, more one from a library written by a quantum mathematician about a lot of different things of which one part was the existance of 10 dimensions) which also didn't help my brain any at different places
Though the impression that stuck with me (and this may be totally incorrect) is that the 5-10 dimension had more to do with sub-atomic particles that whole things (aka you and me).

(and it looks like I've post way off topic...)

Mr_Snow wrote:<SNIP>Though the impression that stuck with me (and this may be totally incorrect) is that the 5-10 dimension had more to do with sub-atomic particles that whole things (aka you and me).<SNIP>

O.K. I sniffed this straight away (using my extra brain capacity, and psychic abilities). There is a thing called the correspondence principle which is the bane of the physicist/philosopher interface. What it broadly states is that whatever the small scale model does it has no impact on the large scale effect. The uncertainty principle for instance is valid in the sub-atomic realm but has no validity or counterpart in the large scale realm.

All of the (post) modernist philosophers who shreiked with delight at the emergence of the fundamental random nature of particle physics did so without actually understanding what it was that this meant. To my knowledge they still don't despite having flattened forrests worth of books conjecturing about rubbish.

CE - To your inciteful (deliberate sp) friend. Tosh. Ballderdash (etc.) Even if this was what our extra brain capacity was doing it would mean nothing in the macro world. He might as well say our brains dream imaginary stuff with the extra capacity. BTW I'm highly skeptical about there being 'extra capacity', I remember a shirt load oif highly complex stuff in my size 8 cranium. If there is spare real estate why do I forget anything?

To the perception of any change idea.....*Sniff* Did someone just fart? Genious my arse. Follows from Zenon's arrow paradox!? The guy is certifiable, again your specialty.

* The ragged cleric falls out of the wheel barrow and lands limbs akimbo in a highly immodest way. *

Oh, my Gods!, why does sin hurt so much! Money to show my bottom? Foul sinner you appear to already owe me some. What are the wages of sin, anyway? Oh and can somebody please tell what the antidote for a pint of Brandy is?

*Recomposes his stinky robes to reveal slightly less * - Curdis !

Mr_Snow wrote:>snip<

(and it looks like I've post way off topic...)

Mr. Snow, in a pub here at SYM, nothing is off-topic.

...especially when you're inebriated...

@Curdis: I think you and Sensei BS would go well with a few rounds of liquor. Your discussions would surely make good dialogue!

*runs for cover*

What a good idea Maharlika

Bring me a pint of beer, a glass of scotch & coke and a shooter of Sambucca.... :mischief:

Mr_Snow wrote:The link I provided was mainly just for the little video on it under the "Imagining the Ten Dimensions" menu option.
Not really for the whole book itself....

I did not manage to run the video, I believe I lack som plug-in, will check that...

(and it looks like I've post way off topic...)

As Mahar says, in bar threads nothing is really off topic, but in relation to my and Curdis' exchange of rants...nothing is really off topic either.

Lemon Curd] BTW I'm highly skeptical about there being 'extra capacity' [/quote] Skeptical?! Skeptical is a good start wrote:parietal lobe[/URL] (the area later called V1, primary visual cortex) and thought that was the end of the visual system. When the major sensory systems were "mapped" this way, the remaining parts of the cortex were popularly conceptualised as "excess", probably from the argument of ignorance "if nobody knows know what it does, my personal belief of what it does must be right".

To the perception of any change idea.....*Sniff* Did someone just fart? Genious my arse. Follows from Zenon's arrow paradox!? The guy is certifiable, again your specialty.

This guy wants to be my student, not my patient. He believes that if I just allowed him to help me out a little, we would get the Nobel prize for these amazing findings. I sent him a mail and asked him how exactly he plans to test his hypothesis. He has not replied.

"That's an interesting thought, why don't you send me a mail with a formulated research plan describing how you want to test this idea?" is the best selection method around to get rid of these self-proclaimed genious students who believe that just because they can think it, it must be a revolution in human knowledge.

End of rant, hello to everybody else, now I'm going to finish up a reference list for my latest article, then I am going to the movies to see "Riding alone for a 1000 miles". I read that in this movie, Zhang Yimou has left the Hollywoodised action kung-fu stuff from Hero and Flying Daggers and returned to the form that originally made paved way for Chinese film in the West with brilliant works like Raise the Red Lantern and Red Sorghum. I'm looking forward to that

I was being a bit sarcastic before,
I meant that I was getting too serious for a spam topic
(that's why it would have been off-topic :laugh: )

And I still haven't recieved my drinks yet, grumbles about the service while going around the bar to pour the drinks himself...

Mr_Snow wrote:I was being a bit sarcastic before,
I meant that I was getting too serious for a spam topic
(that's why it would have been off-topic :laugh: )

And I still haven't recieved my drinks yet, grumbles about the service while going around the bar to pour the drinks himself...

lol! Well, as Mah said, anything goes in a pub thread But, I'm still getting over a nasty flu bug...and therefore nowhere near capable of participating in the fascinating discussion above, so that being the case, I'm quite happy to offer you drinks. On the house, no less, to compensate for the intermittent service

Sorry to hear about your flu DW, hope you get fully over it and it doesn't drag on.

that's for the round (glug, glug, glug)

Man todays dragging on already, and it's only just over 1hr in.
turned up and there was only 1 car here this morning, and max today is 12 people cause the factory's got today as an RDO so none of the boy's are here bar office and mangement.....

...going to be a very quiet and long day...
(thank god it's friday and it's only a 6hr day, but I've got a feeling 5 mins before I've got to leave the boss will want something )

I think I'll need another drink