petrushka.googol

I like to visualize the stages of life : infant, teen, adult, aged as different stages of (neuronal) excitation.

As an infant we are always learning and absorbing.

As a teen we are consolidating.

As an adult we are collecting and disseminating.

As an aged person we are regressing.

These are clear phases with marked characteristics.

Do you agree ?

Is music a symmetry of noise ?

Our ear could well categorize noise as music and vice versa (depending on our tastes).

I think so.

I like to think of events in a person's life as classified into two types :

scalars - those lacking any objective eg) jay-walking on the street

vectors - those with an objective eg) walking from home to office

Needless to say the more vectors you have the more successful you are.

1. Murphy's Law states that "if something must go wrong it will...".

2. We make mistakes in life....(from 1)

3. We live we learn (from our mistakes as per 2)

4. This makes us wise...and more importantly we must be alive for this to happen (as per 3).

So making mistakes is not so bad after all....(from 1/2/3/4)

Seems like Schrodinger's cat is predictable in the above example...

When you see a car or a bus what does it imply ?

Both are objects of the same genre - used for mobility and if used frequently indicate a nervous disposition with an urge to travel. This could be a pointer to other hidden personality traits.

If you fancy a house or a tree, it could presage a need for stability and order.

Do real life objects mimic real life scenarios.

I think so.

I don't understand how the 'Sickness' bullet point is supposed to mimic the universe. (or some of the others as it goes).

 

When you mention 'the creation of two life forms from one' - do you mean cells splitting and multiplying? Again - how does this 'mimic' the universe?

Sickness increases the entropy of a system as disease symptoms disturb the stability of the "human physical system". (if you could visualize that as such). Creation of another organized system (foetus) within a quasi-stable one (the mother) requires additional energy expenditure and physical trauma. Think of the creation of a satellite from a parent proto-planet. The parent child creation involves an entropic change and the creation of two physical entities from one.

Two..is more entropic than one, three more than two and so on......

Life mimics the Universe. Here are some illustrations of the same, expressed as entropic changes.

• The Foetus. Represents an increase in entropy. Creation of two life forms from one.
• Birth. Represents an increase in entropy. Creation of two physical entities from one.
• Growth. Increase in height, weight and other physical parameters. Represents change from the base state of infant.
• Aging. Cell metabolism and geriatric changes represent a change in physical state from a more stable one to a less stable one. Also count mental degeneration like senility.'
• Sickness. Cell wear and tear produce harmful changes in the organism, more evident in malignant tumors. (cancers).
• Death. The most cataclysmic entropic change. The state of being alive changes to the state of being dead.

Is this sheer coincidence or some inherent Universal Law operating at the micro-cosmic level ?

Please opine.

I study consciousness and am absolutely convinced that the physical and the spiritual intersect, but I don't know how this is accomplished. So I do not see Petrushka as being confused; I see him as a forerunner of the people who will actually think about these connections and interactions between science and religion, so we can better understand the "smudging". I much prefer this thinking to the thinking of people who are more interested in jealously guarding ideas of science or religion.

When will we reach the theoretical maximum of miniaturization of transistors as allowed by Moore's Law ?

And what happens afterwards ?

When did the first photon emerge in the timeline of the Universe ?

And how did all photons automatically get modulated to a velocity of 3 x 10⁸ m/s ?

The games of checkers and chess now have computer champions.

The game of Go, played in Asia, is still not quite under the mastery of computers.

How long will this be the case ?

I think your premise, as usual, is based on a concept that is not well-defined and assumes things to be true that you haven't shown to be true. When you talk about a nation, are you talking about its government, or its people? They aren't the same thing, so you can't freely switch between the two.

 

A nation's government can be secular while some large fraction of its people are religious, but I think you'll find more religious diversity in those nations. Did the people of Iran become more religious, or was that because the people who seized power were more religious?

My basic "conjecture" (if you call it that) was whether the thought processes that permeate a nation are a reflection of deeper stirrings in the workings of a nation....

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/06/26/artificial-intelligence-machine-gets-testy-with-its-programmers/

 

For some reason, a part of this conversation seems like it would come from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series.

 

 

The pattern of the conversation follows heuristics and alpha beta pruning. Nothing unexpected.

Much like stalemate in a computer chess program.

Why is it that some nations that were essentially agnostic became theocratic (like Iran post Ayotollah Khomeini) ?

Does this represent a change in the public psyche ?

Why do some nations remain secular ?

Please opine.

Is the heart an intelligent organ ? Does it have emotional memories ? eg. seeing beloved after long time causes euphoria.

Please opine.

Is there any advantage of having large ears ?

Is there any priority in the way the brain processes sensory inputs eg. visual over auditory ?

Please advise.

What causes planetary wobble and does it increase over time ?

Why do you think you can generalize how people use and react to photos? Or to anything for that matter? And why extrapolate from there?

Just trying to rationalize the role of photo albums in our emotional inventory.....

Are old photo albums dopamine reservoirs ?

What is nostalgia ?

And does it invoke a feeling of euphoria, more specifically when browsing old photo albums ?

Also do hard copies of photos better do this than soft copies ?

I read a post on a website that stated that approximately 10^-36 seconds after the Big Bang the Universe expanded disproportionately to the size of an orange. Is the Universe still expanding at the same rate, and if not why ?

Is there something that drives certain people to migrate to other places (some sort of epigenetic trigger) ?

Why is it that less Caucasians prefer to work in warmer climes ?

Why do some people take to a life at sea ? (inspite of obvious drawbacks)..

Why do some people take to flying as a profession ?

Please elucidate your viewpoint.

Yes, but I doubt any two of us would come up with the same concept.

So it's difficult to see what this would achieve.

What were you hoping to find out?

May be trying to find out what would rate highly on the agreeability quotient (particularly among those with XX chromosomes !)

Can we conceptualize an ideal man ?

What would be his attributes ?

Good physique / Good IQ / Flair for art and music etc. ?

And where would that leave autistic individuals (especially those with Asperger's syndrome) ?

Would we then have another Newton or Einstein ?

Please opine.

Did you read the page you cited?

"Part of the problem stems from psychoanalysis's failure to test the validity of its therapeutic approach and failure to ground the discipline in evidence-based practices."

i.e there's no reason to believe it works.

"Part of the reason many are so skeptical of psychoanalysis today is that the body of evidence supporting its effectiveness tends to be relatively weak."

ditto

"However, some of the research on the effectiveness of psychoanalysis has yielded limited support for this treatment modality. "

Curate's egg at best

"Using the criteria established for evidence-based treatment, traditional psychoanalysis alone does not in fact pass muster as a method of therapy for the large majority of psychological disorders,"

 

I.e. it still does not work.

 

you seem determined to believe that Freud's "work" is valid.

Why is that?

Please peruse the article carefully.

I quote from the same article "Recent reviews of neuroscientific work confirm that many of Freud's original observations, not least the pervasive influence of non-conscious processes and the organizing function of emotions for thinking, have found confirmation in laboratory studies,"

Freud made up psychoanalysis.

It may well be used to treat anxiety, but I don't know of any evidence that it works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis#Criticism

Some of Freud's work is still relevant.

http://psychology.about.com/od/sigmundfreud/fl/Is-Psychoanalysis-Still-Relevant-Today.htm