>> ^MycroftHomlz:

As a physicist, I am utterly confused how quantum mechanics plays a role in determining random differences between humans. I think probably chaos is more at work here.
It seems like the rest is conjecture. Even twins sometimes turn out very different. I highly doubt that two people with different genetics when subjected to the same environment and conditioning will arrive at the same end state. There are just way too many variables to assume that that is always true.
>> ^kceaton1:
...True, free will has and will always be an utter joke. People claim they would not do something in someone else's shoes, but if you impose the same biology and conditions--YOU WILL do EXACTLY the same thing (except for random quantum mechanical variations). In fact when it is said and done your mind will be indistinguishable from theirs...



Well to be honest when I wrote "quantum mechanical fluctuations" I'm talking about extremely small scale instances that get "measured" slightly differently (I explain a tad further down below). As particles have a pesky nature of doing two things at once or being measured somewhere else than expected or acting different than expected--it's even been shown to a limited degree that quantum mechanical effects like the dual slit experiment, entanglement, and superposition/duality may have some large scale implications (large scale meaning, the size of a few atoms or a molecule). Anything that would have large scale influences would have to be akin to "The Butterfly Effect". Repeating an event over ,as far as we know, can't be done "perfectly". Hence, the only reason I said fluctuations--yes, folks they would "most likely" be incredibly negligible. Give it 10 billion years then we might have something to talk about (like the small-scale setup at the big bang basically determining the layout and setup of the Universe as we see it now).

Second, what I mean by "wearing someone else's shoes", is to show that that this line of reasoning is impossible as we understand physics and neurology. In my opinion it also shows a very large lack of empathy or understanding in someone. At the least they do not have a good grasp of multiple subjects and how they interrelate; especially concerning the sciences.

I'm saying we would take whatever constitutes "the soul" and stick it in the baby. From my understanding and point of view, as I don't believe in a magical source of self that exists at any level. This would mean, literally nothing changes. Then let things go from there; this really is a time-travel experiment. This is a ludicrous idea. Experience and time, what we face and our decisions, our neurons and their connections and the chemical composition and topography of the brain IS our soul. If you switched places, you WILL be that person; as you don't exist. In your example the other twin would have to literally occupy the exact time and space as her twin--which can't happen; it's untestable. It's a thought experiment. Quantum mechanics would by definition require some changes to occur if "the test" is possible to be created by us--we would change things by interfering in any way.

Only someone religious could ever find a separate or different answer.

I'm talking of a literally switch not a philosophical attributed example (like religion) or a biological test and study of nature/nurture. It is ludicrous, as everything we know about our psyche shows that we experience reality as a type of delusion (practically the only way to describe our reality, psychologically speaking) which can be changed by a great many factors (your biology, drugs, or any interaction). When we communicate to each other (and this is what makes humans so important on Earth and different) we are able to communicate and describe across that sensory and brain created "delusional" void. What can and does get across IS also immense: our experiences, our own point-of-view, our senses, our own delusion. Then we can compare and make a determination of what constitutes reality by ourselves or in a group. Even if someone is high or I should say using anything that will change perception or alter senses, they/we can tell that there is a change through internal logic and experience a new "delusion" or perception. Some religions see this as a way to communicate divinely or likewise; i.e. examples like Native Americans and peyote. It's THE supreme attribute and ability we have as humans as well as "old world" monkeys. They seem to also, "possibly" grasp this "void" and how that barrier can be crossed too. A VERY limited version of ours, however.

We have found ape fossils that suggest that there may've been apes in the past that had I.Q.s in the 300 range. But, without the ability to teach each other, in a very complex manner, they were useless and died off. The fact we can retain old knowledge and teach and re-teach, write it down, save it to a drive, etcetera is the reason why we prosper with a smaller I.Q..

I hope that's much clearer. Or at the least helps. Some is meant for general consumption by others.

/One thing. If you're a physicist as you say, please tell me you don't think "chaos theory" or something akin to it, works on any other level than "maybe" (as we don't know yet) the quantum mechanical level. Everything that is bigger than a particle has very straightforward understandings. Otherwise, we'd have nuclear reactors blowing up everywhere, planes falling out of the sky, etc... Even people would start doing things "for no reason" except: well chaos theory made me do it. If you're talking merely about small-scale interactions still bigger than an atom, then still if you had the detectors, math, and "layout" ready beforehand you'd be able to "predict" an amazing array of things.

The only reason it seems chaotic is sensory and theory deprivation. The main forces of physics (weak/strong/electromagnetism/gravity/pluswhatwefind) describe actions very well. Especially, when we build it.

//Sorry, I think that may be a little too adversarial, but chaos to me is just a lack of "x"--whatever your dealing with.
///Lastly, (a bit more about above) the brain is amazing, but I definitely know I do not even come remotely close to being able to claim I've made a choice due to free-will; modern psychology is starting to understand that this is a fallacy of perception--The Matrix got one thing very right (as much as I hated the second and third shows, THIS was a great line that bears repeating and understanding): It's not the choices that we make that should surprise us, it's why we made the choice in the first place. Free-will is used best with LOTS of pre-planning and thinking ahead; most choices are made for you already. Understanding the way the human brain is doing the stuff it's doing is showing us that "WE" or "ourselves" have a great ability to take horrifically misunderstood or saved-sensory information and make it fit what we want it to fit. It's our rational ability that is the amazing and saving grace for us, or we would ALL be truly mad and lost in our own delusional worlds--each person seeing the world immensely different; like people with illnesses/on drugs/ or having a true mental illness do.

It should be noted that other people can also act like drugs, illnesses, senses, and other type affects on you. Hence, religions do very well at self sustaining belief and manipulation; this goes for all group-think.

A bit long, but this is a subject that I'm impassioned about and I do hope some take it to heart and understand it's implications and ramifications as they're far reaching. It has brought me great peace to know I found some truth in this life. I also have peace in what I would say is my spiritual health (psyche, but more general--including memories and thinking). Losing faith with nothing to use is an extremely disheartening event; I know. Science and understanding helped me transition immensely. I know many others that did not have this to use; I'm not kidding when I say that all sciences and math comes to me easily--many I know don't have this ability. It caused me to fight lies, fear, misunderstandings, and ignorance with patience and the ability to never give up. Truth has one great quality in that it is a lot like water. It finds every nook and cranny on a rock. It goes everywhere and ultimately will collapse and destroy anything that isn't waterproofed and all it needs is time. Ideas are the same, but truth is like water. If you find someone that is willing to at least ask a question of you, that is the half way point. Point them in the right direction and time will cause the change, but they must be curious, steadfast, and ready to question the questions.

Adults are the most lost. With my understanding of the human mind it makes perfect sense why they are the hardest to change. It may eventually be shown that it's impossible to reach everyone, physiological and psychologically speaking. Their own neural pathways and memories literally make it impossible for them to make that change or escape their own delusion, their current mind/brain has no way physically to do it--maybe with drugs or surgery--extreme, I know, but this also goes for chronic depression, mania, and SO MANY other type of conditions.

/Wow, that covered a lot of ground--heavily edited in a few spots for better clarification or expansion of a notion that needed some meat to be understood correctly. Tom Cruise is a moron who may be like what I said in the last point (unfortunately). I hope this is more informative than derisive as some points will be no matter what.

WARNING: Meant to be long and informative.

Gravity is such a weakling.
>> ^Ornthoron:

The electromagnetic coupling constant is approximately
10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 times larger than its gravitational counterpart.
Take that, gravity!

The electromagnetic coupling constant is approximately
10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 times larger than its gravitational counterpart.

Take that, gravity!

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Floating Frog Using Electromagnets. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

I enjoyed reading this web site from beginning to end. It pretty well debunks most of the Building 7 conspiracy theory claims.

I was reading an interesting article about "ghost-hunting" earlier today and I'm amazed at the similarities between ghost hunters and "truthers." Ghost hunters explanations for everything from a cold spot in the house to an electromagnetic disturbance to a ghost hunter getting a mild headache are "ghosts did it"--without any corroborating evidence what-so-ever. Their claim is: if a ghost didn't do it, then what else could it be?

The Building 7 debacle seems to be the same thing to me. The claim always seems to be: if not a conspiracy, then what? It's the lack of any evidence that they claim gives credence to their assertions. Because they don't know why something happened, it must have been a conspiracy.

>> ^ButterflyKisses:

It's plasma energy resulting in what tadd just said. It's a very intense buildup of electromagnetic energy onto the surface area of the bottom of the projectile. In the last clip on this video, the projectile lost structural integrity from the g-forces.
>> ^mtadd:
>> ^VoodooV:
ok...so I'm dumb, if it's electromagnetically propelled, what's with the explosion?

My guess would be its a result of the shockwave from the ballistic reaching supersonic velocity.


actually you are wrong. what you see is projectile's casing falling off. see http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/ORD_EM_Rail_Gun_7MJ_Shot_lg.jpg and http://www.dstl.gov.uk/news_events/images/railgun.jpg

It's plasma energy resulting in what tadd just said. It's a very intense buildup of electromagnetic energy onto the surface area of the bottom of the projectile. In the last clip on this video, the projectile lost structural integrity from the g-forces.

>> ^mtadd:

>> ^VoodooV:
ok...so I'm dumb, if it's electromagnetically propelled, what's with the explosion?

My guess would be its a result of the shockwave from the ballistic reaching supersonic velocity.

>> ^VoodooV:

ok...so I'm dumb, if it's electromagnetically propelled, what's with the explosion?


My guess would be its a result of the shockwave from the ballistic reaching supersonic velocity.

More video here

>> ^VoodooV:

ok...so I'm dumb, if it's electromagnetically propelled, what's with the explosion?


Good question. I'm not sure but I would assume that some electronics burned out causing the sparks and the smoke. Some of the sound could also be from the projectile breaking the sound barrier.

ok...so I'm dumb, if it's electromagnetically propelled, what's with the explosion?

We've found out only a bit more about how it works (Electromagnetism) since this video. Most of the knowledge comes from our particle accelerators. (We've found particles that specifically carry the force, which combine into atoms, then elements, then molecules, and so on...)

Even if we explain how everything works (we figure out gravity's connection, what makes energy into mass) we're still left with origin answers. If you understand Quantum Mechanics w/QED (and as Feynman would say it that, "You don't!") you might allow some to see that "perhaps" we were created from nothing, it just required time.

This is something that we can "conceive" and "imagine". Understanding has definitions with clear boundaries, were as the Universe it seems may only be something that is only "conceivable" until It can define Itself.

/(Being able to "define" itself could be a term to subjectively describe Humanity.)(Or Aliens...)

-- (edited in) --
The only thing the "ICP" added to that speech is that they're correct, but only if the question was asked by a serious mind. Otherwise, they show their complete and utter lack of any knowledge we've had available--to them--since before they were born. It's a parody (almost dark irony; new *tag?) only in the sense of how ridiculously rampant this type of thinking is; in the common populace. It's more ironically sad (as above), in a lot of ways. Their video shows (atleast in their city school zone) how ineffective our teaching methodology/funding is. (Not the teachers; more society and the structure of learning. Teachers tend to be the only glue holding anything together. I've had more than enough first hand knowledge and/or witnessing.)

I could add on forever. The Teachers are willing to change and many bend over backwards; paying for NEW texts (sometimes buying new texts so they don't use some text that has been broken by another state), materials (chemistry, biology, music, etc... pay the most -- unless you're an elementary teacher...then you pay 1/10 your paycheck, if you care for your kids). IT'S not the teachers and the children will go with the flow. There needs to be an ideological change in how kids are taught. I'd go with a college type. Small classes, higher budgets, good training for teachers. Consequences that will make a bully STOP, and if they don't make sure there are classes to help them and if necessary the parents as well. (Yes, parents should be able to be pulled from work.) On staff Doctors/Psych to always help (I know some are starting this). Apprenticing. Not holding a kid back in all areas cause they suck at one. I could go on for awhile longer. Some of this might require us to demobilize the military/industrial complex. Look at how well they can teach "children/teenagers with no hope" into a Tier One Operator, SOC etc...

/Didn't mean to be so long, but as you can see, the "ICP" really bug me.

Your points are both well made and entirely pointless regarding the video. I say that not as an insult but as someone who sees things much as you suggest. The crux is, though, that the same can be said for all of science together. The dissecting of space into abstracts of meaning is no different from any other abstraction that people do. The trouble is, and where I think your description is too simple is that the abstraction and the dynamics are one in the same. The geometry they're trying to get down to in the video here describes the base dynamics of gravity throughout the universe. In that sense, it isn't just a structure applied to the universe by human minds but something fundamental. Describing gravity as a curvature in space time could be considered a human abstraction (like the electromagnetic field or the wave function in quantum mechanics) but the issue of whether the mean gravitational background of the universe is flat or not goes beyond that. Just like the mass and charge of the electron. It's a fundamental; it is the dynamics, the flow.


>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

More over, what is it say it isn't changing or is due to change, or is always in a state of flux. There might be some other more fundamental rule governing that overall shape...or what if the same isn't consistent through the galaxy. And is shape something you need to confine to matter and not the container in which mater is in? If both have a shape, and ones shape is affecting the others shape, what does shape even mean anymore. Is the shape the thing you have, or is it the thing you have after the thing above you is taken into account. What is shape?
My metaphysical interpretation of the universe is non-dimensional. Space having depth, IMO, is a result of the minds interpretation of the details of the universe. While the elements (heheheh) of Euclid's geometry are completely sound, and thus, trying to talk about the shape of the universe as humans experience it will be a question that has an answer, it doesn't answer the more important question, does existence itself have dimension. In the same way that I don't believe color is a property of light, I think you can reduce space and time (though time gets interesting) to an experience of minds.
Even without my own metaphysical framework built up, all interpretations of space (lines, squares, rays) derive their existence from one essential element, the point. A point has no dimension. A line is essentially a collection of dimensionless points. It is not necessary to interpret them as something with dimension. For example, y=x. Algebra, in general, allows for a dimensionless explanation for the interaction of points. Y=x doesn't have to look like anything, per say, for it to be solved in algebra. While humans will retain the contextual information of space and shapes when working for algebra, those are interpretations that correlate back on the human reality. In other words, much akin to a computer program, the universe could (and I believe does) operate without a property of space. Space is a result of minds in the same way monitors construct visual images from a computer. Both are interpretations of dimensionless data.
Seeing in spaces helps us be better hunters, but as that confers to the ultimate truth of reality, I am less certain. The real story might be less about space and gravity, but the overall governing dynamics which exist as a simple set of seemingly arbitrary rules. The reality of the universe might be very closely understood as a computer program or a very sophisticated algebra expression.

Feinman's Quantum ElectroDynamic theory is one of the most successfully predictive theories in the history of science, but my point is that it will eventually be superseded (actually, built upon) by another--more concise--theory. Paradigm shifts are always occurring in science, that's why science is so powerful: it's self-correcting.

Thanks for the complement, but I don't even have an advanced degree.
>> ^Mcboinkens:

>> ^Boise_Lib:
I need a model of how I fucked this comment up. Any takers?

I kind of sensed that you were trying to troll me. But yeah, I mean that statement isn't completely true. We are getting a pretty good idea about the fundamentals now. Virtual particles causing electromagnetic fields and so on. Do you teach a class or something?

[redacted]