Nevin_III

Members
  • Content count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-3 Poor

About Nevin_III

  • Rank
    Quark
  1. I am bored, so I am going to share a to the current ridiculous theory that I believe is in forms the reality of existence. It starts with a seemingly simple question, "what is time?". Which leads to a second question "what is space". Which leads to the question "what is the universe" which leads to the answer "what is conciseness?". Humans have created a reality where they feel comfortable with size relevance, they feel comfortable with time relevance and they feel comfortable with their grasp on the concept of a universe, humanity tends to be ignorant like that. I have heard the argument of if the universe is infinite be made by people I am supposed to think are smart. How can a human have any grasp of size relevance beyond the concepts of the earth. We have no idea how our size is relevant to the universe, no scientific instruments can measure size beyond its relevance to humans. If I ask how big the sun is, I will be told its radius, and its mass as related to human distance, universally small picture information. If asked how far away the sun was I would be told in spacetime how far away the sun is from the earth in miles, if I asked how long it would take to get to the sun I would be told based on a calculation of spacetime how long it would take in human time perception to travel that many miles, all universally small picture concepts. What is human time perception, are we hardcoded and existing in the "time of the change of the universe", or do we perceive the time relevant to distance travel to live and survive on earth. I just experienced the most extreme case of deja vu, I am not going to finish this post. Follow this pattern to find conciseness, see the infinity of time conciseness possibilitys. The reality we are alone in our Universe, but the possibility of simultaneous existences of concisenesses that could never perceive one an other and the multiverse this creates. If all life on earth dies the universe ends. All the things of the Universe would still exist but not in the form, size, or time we perceive it.
  2. What language do you think in?

    The human ability to fluently switch between thought translation opens the door to a profound reality. If we think in our concepts of communication what is stopping us from creating a individualized power language of large concept groupings. We could reason faster and more efficiently, we could tie together patterns with concepts. Example, history has made great play to point out the social awkwardness of the great geniuses. Could these men have spent so much time working on calculus for reasoning that they started to think in it, and dream in it. In understanding that concept, could it be honed, could humans think in rapid sound succession if they tied concepts and these sounds together. It is my opinion that we mostly think in sound communication because sound is the sense most tied to time or timing, and thought is the translation of electrical timings or frequencies. Example of the time hierarchy of the sense of sound, echolocation of bats. Also, could language be the main difference in the intelligence levels of people in similar societies. Does accent, vague concept slang, or misunderstanding of word concepts effect the timing of thought. If this is so, society should put more effort into keeping individual language and the concepts of words clear. Something I know I can work on, as could everyone. I love this comment, really good John. That's something to really think about, but perhaps both can be answered by patterns. Patterns picked up by the language translation of your peers. I don't think the concept of a Rubik's Cube exists without the building blocks of thought translation through language, so solving it could mean anything to an individual. Nor do the concepts of your first language exist without thought translation through language, yet the fact you don't use known language for either can be kind of mind bending. The first language you know from birth is emotion for communication, perhaps pattern problem solving lies in the timing translation of emotion. This could make a little sense out of the first progression of early man, perhaps language progression was caused by the attempt to better communicate emotion feeling, thus causing a chain reaction of growing sound memory concepts shared from individual to individual and built upon. Or maybe pattern problem solving is an entirely different process. I don't think anyone has done research on it to this extent, so it is currently all speculation.
  3. What language do you think in?

    Thanks for the reply Markus, So as an individual your dominant language isn't your first learned but the one that applies as current communication dominant, but you have the ability to change your thought translation with the concept of thought that the application of a different translation better applies or can be easier communicated. That is pretty awesome, I have one more question, before you switch your language of thought translation do you first think in your current dominant language to switch for reason, or can you just fluently in sequence switch between them? Fair enough sensei what you stated is fact, although that fact is completely irrelevant to the post. A question of individual thought translation can be answered by an individual.
  4. What language do you think in?

    This post is more a question than an informal text. Have you ever thought about thinking, or how your thought is translated for individual reason? Do you translate your thought in the language you know? For example, someone born in Russia will think in Russian, while someone born in Japan will think in Japanese. Is this just a coincidence with no meaning beyond communication form, or are we limited to the concepts of individual thought in relation? I also would like to know if anyone multilingual thinks in multiple languages or if they only use their non-dominant language when the concept to apply it is thought in their native language. I find the thought of the time before humans had a devolved language fascinating because before any developed language what language did humans think in, and how could they have reason thinking purely as an individual. Beyond that what language do animals think in, the sounds they understand and make? Or is it with the timing before translation? Does anyone know anything about this?
  5. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Well I enjoyed it but I'm done lol. And I do get your view, its the view that actually gets advancements in science. I share a similar view, this is more just scientific boredom or more overall boredom of the universe . You know though in perception is mordern science not just the art of fools? Mankind has all it needs and more just from the knowledge of our peers. The pursuit for more leads to what gravitational waves? Truth about a potential start an end? More fancy electronics to numb our mind? Better medicine and medical science intill the worlds natural population control can't keep up? The depletion of the things we do need as research? What are we really succeeding in besides an occupation of our time.
  6. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Yeah well strange your the one that seems to show a interest you've commented atleast a dozen times on the subject lol Why in your brilliance are you clicking the infinite state of nothing and spending nearly two days in the fourm, while actually considering your self scientifically inclined?
  7. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Yeah I wasn't really doing this for you, I'm more just deepthinking with criticism from science which is fun. But I got you, I'll try to figure out a way to express this idea scientifically before sharing it. Or I'll atleast go to a different audience this isn't science I agree.
  8. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Alright I've been thinking and have a new speculation. Could this spacetime be a result of perception itself. Bear with me, and please help with the physics in support or denial. Think about the concept, say there was an explosion from unknown phyics and time. Even though this explosion is just a big bang, fast in the time of the physics at play one of the results of the explosion is the chemical process of quantum perception. Because of this chemical process we have a time where the explosion is in a like still perceivable state. Example, Gravitational waves could be the corresponding energy frequency from the explosion. Could first life be connected to the beginning of spacetime. I have an example equation for this one. Now I warn you I am self taught and my day to day math is in more the style of a programming language but I'll try to throw this together with known symbolism and standard calculus . It will probably take me a while.
  9. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Thanks for all the comments strange, was a good "time as perceived" talking to you. Lol
  10. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    I have just one more question. What is time and why did it exist before the first motion or change, before there was a hot dence state?
  11. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Can the early effects of cmb be replicated? If so do you know any references to it? Because I think we might have different views of the same things. I don't really question the knowledge of the people who believe in the big bang or believe in some conspiracy of its introduction lol. im just trying to learn more about the subject through its argument.
  12. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    When was space very hot and very dense? What is the science behind that explanation? The science is called sociology. The act of deeming acceptance to the higher iq individuals of the major nations to accept faith or religious views as general logic.
  13. Time, The Perception of the Infinite Space of Nothing

    Im not trying to sound like a genius, I'm just a big thinker that had an idea and had some success trying to explain it. The formula I was relating to is a formula used in intelligent systems, something I found in a book about abstract fractional calculus. I can't properly reference it. Just throw this thread in the trash please.