Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

DarkBASIC Professional Discussion / [LOCKED] DBPro in 10 years times

Author
Message
Steve J
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Posted: 5th Mar 2007 06:15
It appears contridicting because you believe your emotions are merely chemical reations. Emotions orginate in the cousiousness, and because the brain is linked to the consiousness, chemical reations occur in the brain occur. They are the result of emotions, not the cause.

If you would like to argue that hormones are proof that emotions are chemical controled, remember it's all perception. The brain is the gateway through which we percive the physical world. The brain gives us bare information, (sight, sound, smell, touch, taste) and our consiouness chooses how we will percive and apply emotion to it. Hormones can make things appear different than they seem, because it changes the information our brain gathers. I can verify this, I run in to so many irrational people at school it makes me almost physically ill. (See, emotions can influence the body in addition to the body being able to twist reality and influence emotions) I'm sure you how hormones can make teenage girls behave. For example, there's a girl in my algebra class who interprets people who ignore her as "annoying people who should die." If I were to talk to someone in the class, she explodes with anger ("WHY ARE YOU TALKING TO ME?! GO DIE!!!!") and gives death threats. Friday, she said "I hate you with every bone in my body. Every 200 something bones." Yet I never did anything to make her hate me. Her boyfriend said "Bye!" to me one day, so I said bye back to him. Then he told her "See, he's not crazy." Yet she is still not convinced.

People can appear to be irratinoal, but they think they're doing the logical thing. She thinks I'm talking to her when I'm really talking to someone else. If that story doesn't convince you that hormones can twist perception to infulence emotions, nothing will.


Except your perception was given by these chemicals...you even said it. Hormones are chemicals. You are even more confused. The brain isnt "linked" to the consciousness, it IS the consciousness. The neurons in the brain give us our emotions, dictate our memories, ect. Life, simply put, is one large chemical reaction. Chemical Reactions occur on rocks, in the atmosphere. Are you saying the atmosphere is conscious because it has those reactions occurring?

On your last part: Hormones are chemicals. Perceptions are stored, or created BY chemicals. Emotions, are chemical balances (which is how drugs can make you depressed), or...reactions.

pleading and needing and bleeding and breeding and feeding exceeding..where is everybody? trying and lying defying denying crying and dying..where is everybody?
Code Dragon
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2006
Location: Everywhere
Posted: 5th Mar 2007 16:35 Edited at: 5th Mar 2007 16:57
Quote: "Except your perception was given by these chemicals...you even said it."


Step 1: Brain gathers infromation from sensory organs
Step 2: Hormones and chemicals alter infromation
Step 3: Brain sends infromation to consiousness
Step 4: Consiousness decideds how information will be percived

Does that explain how hormones can influence perception? Perception cannot be controlled because you responsible for 100% of things you percive. Hormones can alter the information the consiousness recieves, so logically one must assume that therefore it influences it. No matter how horrible something appears to be, you can always percive things the way you want. I do it all the time, if I didn't I would probably think your posts are challenging my ideas, an attack on me. But instead I choose to percive them as an oppurtunity to explain to someone that they are not their human body.

If you still choose to believe that consiousness = brain and you = human body, then such is your existence. Meanwhile, for others like myself, our consiousnesses will exist forever. How do you think Jesus rose from the dead? His consiouness survived death, therefore consiouness is not a part of the body. If you don't believe it is possible to have consiousness after death, this article might be able to persuade you:

http://www.stevepavlina.com/articles/life-after-death.htm

Quote: "
Chemical Reactions occur on rocks, in the atmosphere. Are you saying the atmosphere is conscious because it has those reactions occurring?"


I did not say that. The atmosphere is a physical entity, therefore it is not consious. The human body itself is not consious, but a consiousness is linked to it. That's why there's the unconsious mind (part of the brain) and the consious mind (not part of the brain at all) Consiouness does not exist in this physcial world, it has no defined position. It simply exists.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons...for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Steve J
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Posted: 5th Mar 2007 16:56
Quote: "

Step 1: Brain gathers infromation from sensory organs
Step 2: Hormones and chemicals alter infromation
Step 3: Brain sends infromation to consiousness
Step 4: Consiousness decideds how information will be percived"


Wait you still dont look at my posts....

Your organs can only get the information thinks to chemical reactions.
Much like robots can only get it through electric reactions.

Hormones ARE chemicals, which means chemicals affect your perception.
Much like programming of a robot tells it what these things mean coming from its perceptions.

Brain, existing through chemical reactions sustaining life, sends information, not to the consiousness, but to its neurons... The neurons then create the feeling of consiousness from how our perception was recieved (but our perception is basically based on chemical reactions), and actions needed to survive.

This is much like a robot, replace brain with CPU, neurons with harddrives/memory, chemical reactions with electrical ones.

If you are trying to put jesus in an argument....

pleading and needing and bleeding and breeding and feeding exceeding..where is everybody? trying and lying defying denying crying and dying..where is everybody?
Code Dragon
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2006
Location: Everywhere
Posted: 5th Mar 2007 17:09
I see that I have failed to convince you of anything. I was not aware that you percived this as an argument, so I will not waste any more time trying to persuade a closed-minded consiousness...or brain. Maybe the site I linked to in the last post will help somebody understand conisouness.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons...for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Steve J
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Posted: 6th Mar 2007 01:09
Of course, I am close minded because I do not accept your particular brand of beliefs. Of course.

pleading and needing and bleeding and breeding and feeding exceeding..where is everybody? trying and lying defying denying crying and dying..where is everybody?
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 6th Mar 2007 01:21
I'm not sure how people can argue about something that isn't scientifically known yet.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
Steve J
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Posted: 6th Mar 2007 01:23
Heh, scientists do it all the time ( About the beginning of the universe), and religionists too (god)

pleading and needing and bleeding and breeding and feeding exceeding..where is everybody? trying and lying defying denying crying and dying..where is everybody?
that dude
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jan 2004
Location: USA
Posted: 9th Mar 2007 00:17
Before I say anything, please understand that I am just putting in my two cents, and this is not written for the purpose of insulting your intellegence.

Quote: " I don't believe in quantom physics, we're not living in a 26 dimensional universe, and the 4th dimension isn't time, time is something else. The only thing that exists is now, everything else is history or future, no longer existing or not existing yet. I don't believe all that is, was, and will be all coexists and that the only thing that changes is our perception of time, because if that was true we'd have no free will."


There are several problems with this statement. The first is a confusion between string theory (a theory) and relativity. Relativity states that time is not constant, and that it is relative to your velocity (basically). In a nutshell, the faster your moving through space, the faster you are moving through time, taking distortion of gravity into account. Equations supporting this theory have been tested and proven.

Secondly, that still allows for free will. It just means that you arent making the descision when you think you are.


NOW BACK ON TOPIC

@user 2006: I didnt necessarily mean that language syntax/format would change, and if it will, I have no Idea what it will be like. I just cant imagine that the technology will run (on the technical level) anything like it does today, and I dont think that the internal workings of C++ will be sufficient for managing the incredible amounts of processes.

I dont have time to check this for grammar and such so please for give any mistakes .

-Richard

"Damn your eyes!"
"Too late"
Aaron Miller
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Feb 2006
Playing: osu!
Posted: 9th Mar 2007 00:31
@that dude
What you said is completely true. (About everything, time, and the format, etc)


I agree with that 90%.


The only thing I dont agree with is the free will thing. Sure we have choices, but, is it not possible that we are living in our own universe, but we just dont know it? We might think we have free will, but maybe we dont? To be honest, I dont agree with this, because, unless there is solid proof of free will existing, or not existing, I will remain uncertain about this.




Cheers,

-db


Enter my forums here.
Code Dragon
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2006
Location: Everywhere
Posted: 9th Mar 2007 01:11 Edited at: 9th Mar 2007 01:23
Quote: "In a nutshell, the faster your moving through space, the faster you are moving through time"


Ok, I must have overlooked that time is more complicated than I thought. By the way, it's actually the faster you go, the slower you move through time (see the proof below). I've been writing game loops long enough to forget that the real world doesn't stay in time sync with everything. But I think that still doesn't alter the fact that even though time speed can change, that a NOW still exists for every point in space. Time might be traveling faster in one regin of space, but all that means is physics are happening faster.

I've read about time moving slower when you move faster, but the proof overlooked some very important counter-examples (like turn the train car backwards and you get the opposite effect). Can someone explain it better? What I found confusing is this theory:



There are problems with this theory:

The light isn't moving any slower, the train is moving the reciver away with it, that's why it takes longer. They forgot to put the reciever and laser on the same side of the train like this to compensate:



Unless someone builds a clock that slows down while compensating for all 3 dimensions, this theory is wrong.

The light isn't moving any slower, it would only appear to be to an observer on the train. This leads to a contridtion:

If an observer is on the train, time slows down for them also, right? If your time slows down with the light, you shouldn't see any difference. But you do. If a clock is passing through time at the same speed as your are, a second should feel like a second, no matter how short or long the time period is compared to the rest of the universe. But in this example, a second feels longer.

Wow, that turned into a long post.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons...for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Aaron Miller
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Feb 2006
Playing: osu!
Posted: 9th Mar 2007 01:32 Edited at: 9th Mar 2007 01:47
Im gonna have a look at the theory of relativity for a second, then i'll edit this post.


Cheers,

-db

[edit]
Yeah, thats pretty much correct. I still have a hard time believing that the faster you go, the slower the time, but I suppose that makes sense.
[/edit]


Enter my forums here.
that dude
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jan 2004
Location: USA
Posted: 9th Mar 2007 08:57 Edited at: 9th Mar 2007 09:05
Quote: "it's actually the faster you go, the slower you move through time"

Oops, sorry, that was a type-o. My mistake.

In your train problem, it is not properly taking into account the fact that the light is not affected by time dilation, and is a constant velocity relative to everything. Therefore, no matter how fast the emitter or mirror or reciever was going, the light would be going 1.86x10^5 mps relative to it.

-edit- for those not using the crappy american system of units
3.00*10^8 m/s

"Damn your eyes!"
"Too late"
Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Mar 2007 09:09
Locking this now, before some poor noob stumbles upon it and finds themselves questioning the the fabric of reality.

If you feel that you can't let it lie - then whoever feels strongly enough can start a continuing thread in Geek Culture, this is just not the place to be mangling minds like this, sorry.


Good guy, Good guy, Wan...

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-05-19 23:45:09
Your offset time is: 2024-05-19 23:45:09