Power Independence Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register
Power Independence > Book > bears Book > Open for Conversation

 Moderated by: bear Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  Next Page Last Page  
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
Open for Conversation  Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 04:32 pm
  PM Quote Reply
41st Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6386
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
bear,

I see you wrote the following to me:

So his perception exists and you can not poof it away.
I am not the one claiming that I can poof away any perception and that is a signficant difference in my opinion.

If I try to think back to the times when I thought it static time then I can imagine having a problem with doubting something while being confident that something is absolutely true; otherwise I have no problem.

I don't see things as being Black or White as if time is stationary and not moving, and by time I don't mean a stationary thing that is not moving, what I mean is to convey a dynamic perception of constant movement as far as I can perceive such a perception, which is doubtful, as to the accuracy of the perception, but none-the-less a perception.

Like this:

1.
Perceive things as if they must be the way I say they are, and therefore I stop those perceptions as if taking a picture of them, and then, by that method of perception, I have something held constantly as it is while I perceive it, and it cannot change, ever.

2.
Perceive things as if I may be able to understand things while they constantly change and my act of perceiving things may actually be changing the things I perceive.

So I can see myself in my past as someone who can be perceived as a being stuck in a perception that resembles the description 1 above, and I can see myself reaching for someone who can be described as someone existing in the description described in case 2 above, and if I have a problem with "doubt" and "certainty" being a simultaneous perception occurring in me, then I see that happening in case 1 above, and I don't see that being a problem in case 2 above, since I pretend to be, or I strive to be, or I willfully employ my power to direct my perception to be in case 2, more so than case 1, as I may be able to do, with what I perceive to be an accurate measure of success.

I Peter 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

Funny how things work, that works on me as being relevant to the fence I find myself meeting my cousin Mike.

This experiment discovers perception in plants.
How about hydrogen neutrons?


Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 05:11 pm
  PM Quote Reply
42nd Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Joe, I did not mean that you were trying to poof it away. What I meant is that it cannot be poofed away. I should not have said "you."

It was part of building my case.

Sergey has a perception
Joe has a perception
Noah Webster has a perception
bear has a perception

perception exist.

What is so hard about that?

or am I missing the whole idea?

Is the idea to prove that perception does not exist?

...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 05:19 pm
  PM Quote Reply
43rd Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Joe Kelley wrote: I perceive this:

To me 'doubt' and 'absolute truth' are the ends that don't meet.
I perceive this:

Things are not as black and white as perception or no perception.
I love you too.

First is a reference about popular idiom about meeting ends. To me 'absolute truth' excludes 'doubt' in it by definition of being 'absolute'. To me 'absolute' is 'including every scenario'. Including 'doubt'. But since 'doubt' is included - it no longer has its substance being a doubt, because otherwise truth wouldn't be 'absolute' - without it.

Second doesn't contradict the first IF that was the intended meaning by said quoting. 'Absolute' would account for unknown that is neither 'perception' nor 'no perception' and the for the unknown way it affects these two. Yet again - dropping 'absolute' for the fact of possibility of unknown. Perhaps you are saying that there are different shades to being 'absolute'. Yet it seems to defy the purpose of the term. At least that is how I see it.


I am perceiving that you guys love each other!

It's a tough love. The manly one. Common knowledge goes that it requires Vaseline. But actually using it (if we talk about questionable and unnatural sexual practices) is very bad for one's health. So that makes things more tough to an extent. This joke is starting to look like one nasty euphemism so I'm gonna shut up now.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 05:29 pm
  PM Quote Reply
44th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
But the way I see perception is that whether it is true or not is not the point. The point is that everyone has perception. That does not mean that everyone is right. It just means to me that people have opinions. Their opinions are filtered thru their perception. If you go back a page, you will see that I quoted Noah Webster or you can just click this link: http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,perception

Basically perceptions are received thru impmressions by the senses.

I may perceive a room to be cold while you may perceive a room to be warm. Who is right if the temp is 74 f?

When I had cancer I was comfortable at 84. Everyone else was hot. I wasn't my perception was that the temperature was just right.

Perceptions exist, every one has one. It does not have to do with absolute truth or doubt as far as I can understand.

I perceive that you have some measure of enjoyment in being vulgar. You may perceive that you are not vulgar at all.

...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 05:56 pm
  PM Quote Reply
45th Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I perceive that you have some measure of enjoyment in being vulgar. You may perceive that you are not vulgar at all.

I don't find it to be vulgar or inappropriate in this instance. I find it to be a healthy laugh. Obviously that I don't find anything gay-related to be actually natural or in any way justified. Nor would I allow anyone dear to me to be brainwashed by parasites saying otherwise.

I may perceive a room to be cold while you may perceive a room to be warm. Who is right if the temp is 74 f?

Doesn't work. In either perception instance in this case perception is applied to a different situation. One person in the rooms with temp 74f as compared to the other person in the rooms with temp 74f. They don't have to come to the same conclusion to be compared by being right or wrong. They weren't asked what temperature air in the room is. Now the question is what if one person has per say appendicitis seizure? In that event senses are likely to fail. So does the measure of one being right or wrong in one's judgement of the situation. Same goes for your example - different situation, doesn't contradict.

Last edited on Tue Apr 16th, 2013 05:58 pm by Jee-Host[gm]

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 06:35 pm
  PM Quote Reply
46th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Exactly

I don't find it to be vulgar or inappropriate in this instance. I find it to be a healthy laugh. Obviously that I don't find anything gay-related to be actually natural or in any way justified. Nor would I allow anyone dear to me to be brainwashed by parasites saying otherwise.

I have Amish friends, they do not even say the word "pregnant" in mixed company of men and women. My grandmother would not even use the word pregnant.

Their perceptions were based on their reality. I find your words about vasaline and your favorite number that you throw around randomly here and there as being vulgar.

It is my perception. Perception is a person's reality. Perception is not about absolute truth or fact.

Are you denying that there is even such a word as "perception?"


http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,perception
perception
PERCEP'TION, n. [L. perceptio. See Perceive.]


1. The act of perceiving or of receiving impressions by the senses; or that act or process of the mind which makes known an external object. In other words, the notice which the mind takes of external objects. We gain a knowledge of the coldness and smoothness of marble by perception.

2. In philosophy, the faculty of perceiving; the faculty or peculiar part of man's constitution, by which he has knowledge through the medium or instrumentality of the bodily organs.

3. Notion; idea.

4. The state of being affected or capable of being affected by something external.

This experiment discovers perception in plants.


Are you denying that out of the billions of people on this planet that not one single person has a perception?

...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 07:28 pm
  PM Quote Reply
47th Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I find your words about vasaline and your favorite number that you throw around randomly here and there as being vulgar.

Well, some people always assume the worst. Vaseline or if you prefer - petrolatum - has a very specific intended use. And unless you find electric isolation of technical substances being vulgar - you can have whatever make-belief or 'perception' - it won't change anything. Same goes for number 69. It's not my favorite number. But I find it fun that when someone says 'blue' as compared to 'pink' general opinion of many people goes as 'gay and lesbians'. They themselves set themselves to be offended or affected by it. And it's their own fault they assume that. Am I provoking such a reaction? Yes. Do I find it funny? Yes. Why am I doing it? To sort out those who are incapable of thinking for themselves. Because those that are won't ever be offended by it. If some stranger calls me a communist for being Russian - why should I care about this? I don't even know that person. And if this person is not a stranger and says that - there are always signs that person is joking if that is the case. And not seeing them is my own fault, same as if I for some reason get offended by it. Simple logical conclusion. Or at least it should be after shown once.

Some people extensively use the word 'statist' to describe certain individuals. I have the word 'casuals'. I try so people are neither statists nor casuals. Waking up is not an easy-doing job. But it's very humane as results show. And if even one out of hundred will stop being a casual as result of my influence - It's worth 99 other casuals getting really angry with me.

Perception is a person's reality. Perception is not about absolute truth or fact

So you're saying Joe lives in his very own private reality with complete disregard for the truth? The fact that whatever it is he comes up with to describe or in any way make sense out of anything is limited by his own perception automatically invalidates any attempt for reaching the truth by him? That is a nice one (sarcasm intended).

Now BEAR in mind that since you are also a subject for this - you formulating this statement and implication of it is also limited by your own imperfect perception. Thus the statement's validity can never be refuted (according to the base premise), making it an axiom. Then what right do you have to make a statement that caves in on itself just like that? If it isn't about truth, what is true about it? Who can tell? Logic? Having a hard time seeing sense in this.

Are you denying that there is even such a word as "perception?"
Are you denying that out of the billions of people on this planet that not one single person has a perception

Case and point. You'd probably like Tractatus Logico-Philosphicus by Ludwig Wittegenstein. He pretty much supported your idea, but went an extensive mathematical way about it. Failed, eventually, but was convinced that he didn't.

Last edited on Tue Apr 16th, 2013 07:46 pm by Jee-Host[gm]

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue Apr 16th, 2013 10:58 pm
  PM Quote Reply
48th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I am saying that perception is not bound by truth.

I can perceive something incorrectly. That does not mean that I am right. But it is still, however, my perception.

I think if you go back and read your words about vaseline and tough love you might be able to decide why I perceived a certain vulgarity. However, I am perceiving that you would have the same perception of vulgarity.

As far as you being a communist because you are from Russia, I have never perceived that. When I see a Russian, I do not say, "There goes a communist."

I may think, I wonder how communism has affected that person's life.

I worked at NASA. We had a meeting with some Russians regarding the MIR space station. There were several Russians. None of them smiled. None of them showed any emotional expression. It was strange to me. But maybe in a business meeting that sort of thing is not appropriate?

That doesn't mean I think it is because of communism. I don't know. It could be cultural.

It did make me wonder though. And it made me a bit sad not to read happiness in their countenance.

And as far as the number I have associated with you, if it is shock value you are trying to get, to me it is more an irritation that I have to go thru the mental gymnastics to read past it.

...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 12:11 am
  PM Quote Reply
49th Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I am saying that perception is not bound by truth.
Nothing is bound by truth. Truth is just how things are. It doesn't bind them to be that way - it's just a description of them being what they are. If one can change state of things - one changes truth about them. Perception is not an exception out of anything. It's material process. Yet talking about is relevant to the truth. Because how ever we perceive perception - we either delude ourselves or not.

I can perceive something incorrectly. That does not mean that I am right. But it is still, however, my perception.

Doesn't mean that you are right. And doesn't mean that you can't be right. And doesn't mean that it is irrelevant in relation to truth.
I think if you go back and read your words about vaseline and tough love you might be able to decide why I perceived a certain vulgarity. However, I am perceiving that you would have the same perception of vulgarity.
As I said - some people tend to assume the worst. If you look it up - 'tough love' is actually a common slang term in IT industry. For one, it refers to parts of any electric device that require application of strength with both hands in an awkward position to assemble them together. And - oh my gosh - sufficient grade isolation lube is not uncommon. Ah... I guess you never figured which part of it was the joke and what I referred to. But it's your 'perception' that makes it vulgar, not me.
As far as you being a communist because you are from Russia, I have never perceived that. When I see a Russian, I do not say, "There goes a communist."
I never even suggested that you do.
I may think, I wonder how communism has affected that person's life.
Hopefully I don't expire before I get to something relevant in that little history lesson topic.
I worked at NASA. We had a meeting with some Russians regarding the MIR space station. There were several Russians. None of them smiled. None of them showed any emotional expression. It was strange to me. But maybe in a business meeting that sort of thing is not appropriate?
Closing MIR was entirely political decision. And ever since the end of USSR all (now - just almost all) political decisions here are for US benefit. Science folk somewhat get the gist of things. Hard to to pursue science wholeheartedly with people, whose government destroys your field of work.
It could be cultural.
It isn't.
It did make me wonder though. And it made me a bit sad not to read happiness in their countenance.
I myself find that I can't judge people by their appearance. Have a decent sample size of people who are simply better than others, but you can never tell about it from the outside. And you won't hear about it from them either. Some people won't outburst and open their hearts willy-nilly. And it's because they value their hearts so, not because they are afraid. Don't get me wrong - people with easy friendliness are great. But thoughtful mysterious type I find to be ever much more capable being a capital P personalities.
And as far as the number I have associated with you, if it is shock value you are trying to get, to me it is more an irritation that I have to go thru the mental gymnastics to read past it.
Think of it as a test. If person can't workout with iron weight - that person probably shouldn't get a rubber weight resembling the iron one. That is just pretending. There was a time when I couldn't speak very comprehensively. Always sounded somewhat clunky and mediocre. Didn't take me long to get past that problem on my own. Food for thought. Doing certain thinking 'motion' one has a good chance to learn to think with more efficiency. That doesn't mean that I try to hide stuff under the wall of words. But then when one is able to read such constructions - there is much more feel to the words than before. How can I put it...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 01:36 am
  PM Quote Reply
50th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
But actually using it (if we talk about questionable and unnatural sexual practices) is very bad for one's health. So that makes things more tough to an extent. This joke is starting to look like one nasty euphemism so I'm gonna shut up now.

BU tit's you 'perception' that makes it vulgar, not me.

Perception exists.

It was probably during the early/mid 90's when I was in a meeting with the Russian scientists. It was the beginning effort for the Space Shuttle to doc with MIR. I had to document minutes to the discussion of safety issues and mitigations. Government work includes a lot of paper pushing...after all...it tain't their money their spending.

I did alot of smiling. I wonder what they thought? I was willy-nilly wearing my feelings on my sleeves, or I was a friendly American happy to have the opportunity to be present in the room of such reknown scientists making history?

I was just a technical writer and an engineering aid. But I found the work very interesting.

I am not as well educated as you are Sergey. I doubt if I could read

Tractatus Logico-Philosphicus by Ludwig Wittegenstein.

but no worries, I do not need his mathematic equations to prove perception exists. You my well-read Russian Friend who understands all that stuff, have already told me so:

BU tit's you 'perception' that makes it vulgar, not me.

tis only my perception...and I can count to 1...or would that be 3: Me, Myself, and I?

I could ask you for your perception on whether it is 1 or 3,
but then we would have to decide if it is 2 or 6;
we 2 (or is that us 6) could include Joe,
but then we would have to decide if it is 3 or 9;
should we ask Mike too?

Is too a number or a word?

If I asked you that question audibly, what would be your perception?

Oh no, now we have to start multiplying the number of perceptions each person holds along with deciding how many people each person really is.

Joe's perception is that perception exists and that there is a perception, so indeed, perception exists.

...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 01:04 pm
  PM Quote Reply
51st Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I am not as well educated as you are Sergey. I doubt if I could read

Tractatus Logico-Philosphicus by Ludwig Wittegenstein.


Well, your choice. Book is not that difficult. 'Ulysses' by James Joyce is much more difficul for example. I am not extremely well-educated by the way. True - I have batchelor grade from university (or however you name that in English) behind me, but most of my actual education is a personal effort by me. So don't overestimate it )).

could ask you for your perception on whether it is 1 or 3,
but then we would have to decide if it is 2 or 6;
we 2 (or is that us 6) could include Joe,
but then we would have to decide if it is 3 or 9;
should we ask Mike too?


How about we play a little game. You might know this one, but still, let's see if you find it as funny as I do:

Question: 2 + 2 = ?
Answer: 11
Response: Correct. Why?

Now if you manage this out without prior knowledge of it - then you get pure 'kudos' (as they say it nowadays) from me.

Joe's perception is that perception exists and that there is a perception, so indeed, perception exists.

There were also certain words about 'absolute truth'. And that is what rustles my jimmies, I made that apparent. Think about any conception in relation to it's development in scientific way. Broadening the horizon, including more facts. It changes less general theories about anything withing the conception. Perception is no different. Now think about what it is exactly that compels me to argue about all this. Is it just me messing around? Or following my 'perception'? Or maybe, just maybe, I have some knowledge that points me towards conclusions I profess, which are so hard for certain people to BEAR?

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 01:42 pm
  PM Quote Reply
52nd Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Sergey, I do not know the answer readily to why 2+2 = 11 and I will be gone most of the day. I can assure you it will be along with the foremost things in my mind. I do want to earn your kudos. I may not arrive at the answer though, but I will try. I will report in later today.

Yes, Absolute Truth Exists. I believe that without a doubt. If truth is not absolute, it is really not truth at all? It may be conjecture or perception, but that is not truth until it is proven to be absolute, IMO.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 03:13 pm
  PM Quote Reply
53rd Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Yes, Absolute Truth Exists. I believe that without a doubt. If truth is not absolute, it is really not truth at all? It may be conjecture or perception, but that is not truth until it is proven to be absolute, IMO.

Amen, sister ))). Seriously, though, I agree with this statement. So 'perception exists' is more like a conjecture (that word means something like 'guess', right?), rather than 'absolute truth'.

Last edited on Wed Apr 17th, 2013 03:15 pm by Jee-Host[gm]

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 07:27 pm
  PM Quote Reply
54th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
perceive seems a little different than conjecture in that conjecture is maybe more like a theory or hypothesis where as a perception is more like something that someone might believe based upon their own personal imput. I may perceive that you are mad at me for some reason or another, or I might perceive that is cold outside because it is cloudy and windy.

I cannot really know whether you are mad at me unless you confess the fact. (just an example, I don't really think you are mad at me.)

I really wont know that it is cold outside until I walk outside and find that it is indeed cold (to me). Today I found out after I left the house that I had dressed too warmly based upon the view outside my window and the early morning temperature.

Monday however, I did not dress warmly enough because the day before had been absolutely beautiful and I expected the same weather Monday. I was cold all day because my perception was wrong.

Perception does not have to be wrong. Perception could also be correct. I perceive that I will not be sitting here much longer. Time will tell whether my perception is correct or not.

Now Joe and I go round and round on definitions, so you might ask Joe what his perception of the word perception is. We just had a conversation about the word pretending. The way he thinks about the word pretending had never crossed my mind before. And I probably still would not use that word the way he does. However, I can see what he means now.

I still don't have the answer to the number quiz you have given me. I am tempted to ask the Amish folk I am with, but I figure if I can't get it on my own, I will give you the privilege of disclosing the answer, if you are so inclined. So far the only thing I can see about

2 + 2 = 11 is more along the line of integer placement. i.e. 2 and 2 are 2 integers 1 and 1 are two integers.

(I don't even know if i am using the term integer correctly, but I am waiting for the Amish to finish an appointment so I am not going to take the time to look the word up to see if I am using it right. I think an integer is basically just a number.)

I hope you enjoyed this "nothing note" from an American and that it was not a total waste of your time :)

...

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 07:33 pm
  PM Quote Reply
55th Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I can give you a clue (made it white so you won't read it if you don't want a clue yet):


2 + 2 = 4
Yet
2 + 2 = 11
So what?
4 = 11 ?
That's right. Figure out in which case that happens - and you will solve the puzzle.

Last edited on Wed Apr 17th, 2013 07:34 pm by Jee-Host[gm]

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Thu Apr 18th, 2013 02:40 am
  PM Quote Reply
56th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
When is 4 = 11?

It depends on Where you are in the world.

Pick a place: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/custom.html?continent=all&sort=2&low=4

I looked at your clue and this is the thought it gave me. But I don't know if it is the answer you are looking for.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Thu Apr 18th, 2013 07:05 am
  PM Quote Reply
57th Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Well, no, but I like the thought. Tell you what, if all conditions are met (including that 2 + 2 = 11), thenit might as well be considered the right answer.

However, intended answer is this:


2 + 2 = 11 is true in ternary (base-3) numeral system
Such is a system when you use just 3 numbers for counting, unlike common 10. In ternary system counting from 0 to 10 looks like this:

0, 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 20, 21, 22, 100, 101

So, naturally, in this system 2 + 2 = 4, you just write 4 in a different way. The fun part is that it is generally assumed that '11' means 'eleven' while it's just a notation. Little trick.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Thu Apr 18th, 2013 02:10 pm
  PM Quote Reply
58th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I'm not looking yet...I want to think about it some more, since I went in a different direction. But thank you for including the answer, I imagine I may have to look at it :)

In this case, my perception of the quiz ended with a correct answer even though it was not the intended answer.

Absolute truth can have more than a single truth?

Just tossing out another suggestion

2 + 2 = 11

when 2 = 5.5

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Thu Apr 18th, 2013 05:04 pm
  PM Quote Reply
59th Post
Jee-Host[gm]
Member


Joined: Sat Apr 6th, 2013
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Posts: 107
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
2 is not a variable here, so no.

Absolute truth can have more than a single truth?
Is it me, or does that sound self-contradictory?

Truth is single even in terms of quantum non-locality.

I called the answer "might as well be correct", because it meets conditions. However, it's not the same kind of satisfaction as in finding the intended answer now, is it? )))

Last edited on Thu Apr 18th, 2013 05:06 pm by Jee-Host[gm]

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Thu Apr 18th, 2013 06:13 pm
  PM Quote Reply
60th Post
bear
Member
 

Joined: Thu Nov 15th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 748
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Truth is single even in terms of quantum non-locality.

Sergey, I have never even heard the word Quantum nonlocality so I looked it up on wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality is the phenomenon by which the measurements made at a microscopic level necessarily refute one or more notions (often referred to as local realism) that are regarded as intuitively true in classical mechanics. Rigorously, quantum nonlocality refers to quantum mechanical predictions of many-system measurement correlations that cannot be simulated by any local hidden variable theory. Many entangled quantum states produce such correlations when measured, as demonstrated by Bell's theorem.
---------------------
I bearly even know what all that means and I suppose I could read it 3 more times to try to let it sink in, but at the moment I am not interested in what it means because I am going to give you 4 absoulte truths:

I am a Sister
I am a Wife
I am a Mother
I am a Daughter

Why does microscopic measurement have to be the determination of absolute truth?

OK so I go back and look at the wiki article. I can't even understand the supposed experiment. It is too much for my chemo laden, 50 year old, unexercised brain to keep straight. And I do not have the desire to try to figure it out. I suppose that is quantum physics stuff? I don't even know what that is. Really, I don't even know what quantum is. I guess I might look up that word to see.

And after that self-debasing sentance I decided to go and look at the answer to the quiz:

2 + 2 = 11 is true in ternary (base-3) numeral system
Such is a system when you use just 3 numbers for counting, unlike common 10. In ternary system counting from 0 to 10 looks like this:

0, 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 20, 21, 22, 100, 101

So, naturally, in this system 2 + 2 = 4, you just write 4 in a different way. The fun part is that it is generally assumed


No, I would have never gotten the answer, never, in a million years. I know nothing about ternary counting systems. But I am inspired to ask. What is the value of 0? Is it truley 0 or is it 1? Why? Says Who?

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 08:47 pm Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  Next Page Last Page    
Power Independence > Book > bears Book > Open for Conversation Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems