geordief

I never heard "tickle" used like that.It sounds different from "tinkling"-more artistic. "Tinkling" sounds a bit deprecating whereas "tickling" brings to mind trout tickling which seems a bit arcane. https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,896457,00.html

Ivories sounds like a bit of a euphemism. Maybe there is hope for us all in the afterlife. (unless you meant to say "tinkles?" )

A very uneducated guess is that you can run two stills of the scene (one immediately following another) like when they first invented the movies and you could see a lady undressing or a horse galloping(so I have heard) . It should show "movement" on the small scale.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66964430 "This year's Nobel Prize in Physics rewards experiments with light that capture "the shortest of moments" and opened a window on the world of electrons." Seems like a very big deal.They seem to be saying that practical or theoretical consequences may be in the pipeline. Does anyone here have an understanding on the ongoing research into this field?

Is there a reason for the proportion of one form to the other that has been observed? Is that promotion expected to be the same everywhere in the observable universe? Edit:a quick Google search brings up this Wikipedia page which seems to go into the question https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryon_asymmetry

This gets boring.Einstein (et al) was right. So was it just 50/50 which form of matter won out at the beginning? Or is matter more than just the mirror image of anti matter?

How can one distinguish between an internal process and an external process? If I had an artificial bladder installed would that still be internal? Btw does the number of senses we can have depend on the number of distinct sensory apparatuses we have or on the characteristics of the possible sensory links that can exist between the brain and its environment? (Eg infra red vision )

Yes ,they did a few times (and I stopped disposing of it there when I saw it happening) They are used to being given buckets of garden /kitchen waste and so followed me when they see me or the bucket. They are also partial to the dried,unburned peat(as is the dog) which is no harm.

We don't know,do we? I am guessing that,in the womb our tactile sensations might have been far more heightened than afterwards. Might unsighted infants be able to "visualize" their surroundings merely from movement,hearing and tactile sensations? If so ,they would carry that through their lives even only as an atrophied capability that might still retain something I wonder if "everblind" people can have vivid dreams.If the optical nerve is completely dead ,does the brain still have an ability to "think visually"....a bit like how we get "phantom pain" from missing limbs (I think that is fairly well established)

They must be able to imagine simple scenes or they wouldn't be able to navigate around the room. You could call fast movements red and slow movements blue. Actually touch and vision are similar in that they are both em related. You could call a sharp contact blue and a caress red. Markus knows all about synaesthesia (as do we all to a degree I believe) "Red" is just a relative term and it could be relative to anything (disregarding practicalities)

That was what I wa That was what I was worried about.That poor toad may have had a bad skin burn all over its body unless it stood in the rain or got into water quickly. I didn't have time to think and give it a wash before throwing it out onto the lawn. And the donkeys eat the ash straight from the bucket if I throw it into the field (which I no longer do)

"Seeing" is like "understanding" or "learning" I think we only experience anything by reference to something else. There are no pure experiences ,just relationships between experiences. If someone is blind from birth and ,in our eyes has no understanding of what we experience when we see something we call "red" it is a sufficient to paint (no pun intended) a scene for them ,any scene will do. Then we tell them (say it is the scene of a shipwreck at sea.) "The boat is red" And ,with the scene in their mind they will associate that boat with "redness" That is their "red" from now on (so long as they remain blind and perhaps even if they later gain the faculty of vision)

Not an indication that the donkey's diet is deficient? In the past ,an ignorant animal inspector told us to feed them more and they ended up with laminitis.(the vet told us to ignore her-wrote her a nasty letter) We just let them graze the field now and only give them hay if the grass disappears in winter or if the weather is inclement.

A toad got into the house late at night when I was bringing in furniture from the rain. I spotted it on the carpet when I closed the door and went looking for a container to catch it into. I found it against the wall but it hopped away from my attempts at capture -as far as ,and into the open (cold) fire. I managed to quickly catch it with my right hand and carried it outside again where I cast it onto the wet and grassy lawn. I wondered afterwards whether it had suffered any damage from its brief visit to to fireplace. It was covered in wood and peat ash(cold as the fire had not been lit since the day before). Would that ash have damaged its skin? It was a wet night which ,with the long grass would have washed most of it off quite soon I imagine but I wonder how sensitive a skin a toad has and whether that might have been very damaging for it. On a related note ,whenever I dispose of those ashes normally I try to put the somewhere our donkeys cannot get at them because they will eat them and ,again I wonder how good that is for them (they also roll in them)

Can it be defined in different ways? Can it exist in different ways(as different phenomena but to which the description "consciousness" might apply)? Can we only understand "consciousness" by the function it fills? Naively I used to think it was like a binary on/off switch .Can there be degrees.Can it be both? ** Would those different ways have something in common? **oddly ,yesterday (and for the first time ever) as I went about town I noticed my mood dropping very quickly and for no apparent reason. Could that be a diminution of consciousness?(like a diminution of that "glad to be alive" feeling) Maybe it is a common feeling that I never noticed before..

Because consciousness is a process and not a thing?

The sooner we find life on other planets the better.Just try not to get trampled in the stampede trying to join them

Is that what a properly functioning system of laws is intended to counteract? At least if the administration of law is unjust it is visibly so and any decisions should have the weight of lengthy periods of consideration. Is the legal system in practice a buffer against blind hatred? What happened in Germany or USSR ,I wonder?Did the judges put up any resistance? Were those who did removed from their positions or did they just go with the flow? I imagine the legal system remained in place and formalities were still followed .

That's true but they have been under attack from their neighbours since the state was formed. What do their neighbours expect ?That they not defend themselves? Grossly insulting to compare their policies with that of Hitler. Why would anyone do that?

Another approach is to feel shame that any group of people in any way connected to oneself has committed or imagined such a vile collection of acts . They brought shame on themselves and all who did not actively oppose them. I can't understand why the OP thought his or any religion was relevant ,unless they were saying "well I am not Jewish and so am not biased in that respect " In other words ,perhaps implying that a Jewish person might have stronger feelings about it than others. It is an interesting point that vile acts have also been committed against other groups throughout history(even if the holocaust seems to have been the worst in concept because of its sickening rationality and preparation.) To analyse it ,whilst necessary almost seems to play into the hands of those who admire and seek to emulate the perpetrators. What frightens me is the thought that ,whilst this crime may have taken place in Germany other countries might well have been willing to participate . After all the Jews have been hounded down the centuries and Hitler may have been referring to this when he said that this industrial mass genocide would resolve the "Jewish question" once and for all.

(Geordief asked "Is it right that some people consider the total energy in the universe to be zero" Gennady answered "Yes" ) If that is anyway near correct ,the expression "an infinite amount of energy" seems close to being a contradiction in terms..

In any case energy is a (relative) number rather than a thing isn't it. An infinite number of energies might sum up to a very small 'resultant" (is that right?) whereas there might be a way of directing the energy systems (whatever that means) so as to sum up to an infinite resultant . I imagine that is meaningless gobbledegook but perhaps you can devine something in it? Ps Is it right that some people consider the total energy in the universe to be zero?

Why not?

If you had infinite energy could you end up breaking the "fabric" of the universe ? (semi seriously) I mean "blow it apart"

Plus leeks and anything from the onion family? Is wine in sauces also bad?