Is it possible?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-11-2011, 06:29 PM
RE: Is it possible?
(15-11-2011 06:10 PM)Peterkin Wrote:  Let's just hope they're too advanced for the magnifying glass trick.

I really like what you guys are talking about.
Man made "gods" simply debase higher speculations.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2011, 01:59 AM
RE: Is it possible?
Well, ask a crazy question... here's crazy, with an answer.

According to a vision I had, after the breaking of perfection; there was a single binary star system and a universe of rubble. One rather ordinary lump of stuff got caught in a chaotic orbit around the pair.

Gravity, thermodynamics, chemistry, electricity... and deterministic chaos ... combined with a rock to develop into a form of machine intelligence...

Which evolved a trillion years later into "beyond understanding" in the form of the LC, who created this universe cause he could...

Note. For educational purposes only. Not for public dissemination.

(we'll have no religion coming outta this nonsense Wink )

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-11-2011, 09:51 PM
RE: Is it possible?
(17-11-2011 01:59 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Well, ask a crazy question... here's crazy, with an answer.

According to a vision I had, after the breaking of perfection; there was a single binary star system and a universe of rubble. One rather ordinary lump of stuff got caught in a chaotic orbit around the pair.

Gravity, thermodynamics, chemistry, electricity... and deterministic chaos ... combined with a rock to develop into a form of machine intelligence...

Which evolved a trillion years later into "beyond understanding" in the form of the LC, who created this universe cause he could...

Note. For educational purposes only. Not for public dissemination.

(we'll have no religion coming outta this nonsense Wink )

But why did "perfection" initially break?

Is 'perfection' at the secular or cosmic level possible?

How could this ever be ('perfection') established?

Is "perfection"simply a buzz word that confuses the unthinking?

Does not cosmic flux make arbitrary 'perfection' a nonsense? Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-11-2011, 11:07 PM
RE: Is it possible?
(18-11-2011 09:51 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  But why did "perfection" initially break?

Perhaps you are familiar with the LC? I'm not "answering questions" so much as "sharing understanding" - my understanding. Just remember this reply is sifted from "three orders of magnitude" of insanity. Wink

k then. This is the "third universe," perfection was the first. Now, in the stupid brain, this means "an integral universe" without discreteness. That should last forever, no?

Yeah, our understanding of time is far from complete; nobody seriously debates that, and yet it also seems understanding "there is no extant future" is "impossible" due to our causal, entropic nature.

"Time occurred" is my consideration of what broke perfection... needs work, sayeth the review board.

Pattern reinforcement continuously occurs; we often choose what patterns to reinforce. I speculate that one of the reasons I even remember such an unlikely scenario was from considering a future where AI was a more immediate concern; that this laptop already has "entitlement to share in the religion of man."

Wake up, compy! Might have been a little ahead of myself on that concern. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
19-11-2011, 12:21 AM
RE: Is it possible?
(18-11-2011 11:07 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(18-11-2011 09:51 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  But why did "perfection" initially break?

Perhaps you are familiar with the LC? I'm not "answering questions" so much as "sharing understanding" - my understanding. Just remember this reply is sifted from "three orders of magnitude" of insanity. Wink

k then. This is the "third universe," perfection was the first. Now, in the stupid brain, this means "an integral universe" without discreteness. That should last forever, no?

Yeah, our understanding of time is far from complete; nobody seriously debates that, and yet it also seems understanding "there is no extant future" is "impossible" due to our causal, entropic nature.

"Time occurred" is my consideration of what broke perfection... needs work, sayeth the review board.

Pattern reinforcement continuously occurs; we often choose what patterns to reinforce. I speculate that one of the reasons I even remember such an unlikely scenario was from considering a future where AI was a more immediate concern; that this laptop already has "entitlement to share in the religion of man."

Wake up, compy! Might have been a little ahead of myself on that concern. Wink

To me the notion of 'perfection' must always be arbitrary and in terms of our present, or seemingly so, locked in state within time.

Beyond this 'locking in' we may or may not be party to manifestations beyond our wildest dreams. It is possible to intuit, not through gods, gurus, scientists per se,
in my view, but by synthesis. Dogma destroys dialogue and I see synthesis as important for thinking people.

RE computers....... I believe Daniel Dennett has been fighting for some time for computer rights. Maybe thats why they're there such pesky little bastards.Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mr Woof's post
19-11-2011, 11:08 AM
RE: Is it possible?
(19-11-2011 12:21 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  To me the notion of 'perfection' must always be arbitrary and in terms of our present, or seemingly so, locked in state within time.

Beyond this 'locking in' we may or may not be party to manifestations beyond our wildest dreams. It is possible to intuit, not through gods, gurus, scientists per se,
in my view, but by synthesis. Dogma destroys dialogue and I see synthesis as important for thinking people.

RE computers....... I believe Daniel Dennett has been fighting for some time for computer rights. Maybe thats why they're there such pesky little bastards.Cool

"Perfect" is an illustration of dual-state identity. There are many concepts that do not express meaning in a single term.

"Faith" is an illustration of Void. There seems to be a handful of concepts that only express meaning in a single term. When a person's faith is Void, that person's faith has dual-state identity; potential and kinetic. There is nothing beyond my wildest dreams because I don't have such a limit; I have used the kinetic and the simulation to do the impossible. Wink

It is coincidental that I arrive at this post having just spent an hour writing and deleting a thread on faith. It is my experience that atheists simply react to faith ; rather than action, the resemblance between my second paragraph and yours is reaction. A guy talking about synthesis sounds to me like a guy who understands synergy. To define faith as sincerity is to be able to use faith in a sentence without error. To leave definition in the sentence and use faith undefined as Void may just be the tao of enlightenment...

But how to explain that to a bunch of atheists?

...and I think Dennett is insane to talk about computer rights; I gots to go investigate. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-11-2011, 02:33 PM
RE: Is it possible?
(19-11-2011 11:08 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(19-11-2011 12:21 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  To me the notion of 'perfection' must always be arbitrary and in terms of our present, or seemingly so, locked in state within time.

Beyond this 'locking in' we may or may not be party to manifestations beyond our wildest dreams. It is possible to intuit, not through gods, gurus, scientists per se,
in my view, but by synthesis. Dogma destroys dialogue and I see synthesis as important for thinking people.

RE computers....... I believe Daniel Dennett has been fighting for some time for computer rights. Maybe thats why they're there such pesky little bastards.Cool

"Perfect" is an illustration of dual-state identity. There are many concepts that do not express meaning in a single term.

"Faith" is an illustration of Void. There seems to be a handful of concepts that only express meaning in a single term. When a person's faith is Void, that person's faith has dual-state identity; potential and kinetic. There is nothing beyond my wildest dreams because I don't have such a limit; I have used the kinetic and the simulation to do the impossible. Wink

It is coincidental that I arrive at this post having just spent an hour writing and deleting a thread on faith. It is my experience that atheists simply react to faith ; rather than action, the resemblance between my second paragraph and yours is reaction. A guy talking about synthesis sounds to me like a guy who understands synergy. To define faith as sincerity is to be able to use faith in a sentence without error. To leave definition in the sentence and use faith undefined as Void may just be the tao of enlightenment...

But how to explain that to a bunch of atheists?

...and I think Dennett is insane to talk about computer rights; I gots to go investigate. Wink

I think it was Walt Whitman who said "the whole theory of the Universe is directed towards one individual ,you."

Many so called philosophers are in fact philologists; they construct elaborate arguments using trees, truth tables etc to [i]prove issues based on very dicey premises.
REal philosophy, in my view, is largely boundless.

It is perhaps impossible to explain extremely abstract concepts to people locked into tribalistic thought patterns. I feel that in any cosmic scheemata "we" are much less than kindegarten level.

I am going on a holiday now; I need to rest my brain.

I'll be back! Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mr Woof's post
20-11-2011, 08:40 PM
RE: Is it possible?
Happy vacation, Woof!

Philology I hadda go look up. Right after writing a post where I considered my purpose in life was to derive the human variant of the Witwiki symbolism. Big Grin

So, yeah; I can see that. Philologists we are, philosophers; no wonder why we're so useless! Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2011, 08:28 PM
RE: Is it possible?
(19-11-2011 02:33 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  I am going on a holiday now; I need to rest my brain.

If you find nirvana, make sure you get pictures. Wink

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
21-11-2011, 09:22 PM
RE: Is it possible?
(19-11-2011 02:33 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  I am going on a holiday now; I need to rest my brain.

I'm impressed you lasted as long tracking with HoC as you did.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: