DrP
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DrP
-
-
-
-
-
21 hours ago, imtss said:
It's alittle more than that. In addition to this statement should be " .....my body as well as create some kind of neural impulse within that so said percevied body part using some kind of motor function that derives from the mind that causes physiological changes such as sweeting, enlarged pupils , increased heart rate, etc.
That's just how the body works. It reacts to changes in your psychological state. You are just 'feeling'. Most people can do it. I read an article recently that mentioned that some people can reach orgasm just from thinking. The connection between body and mind is strong and complex. It's not some magical power.
-
Edited by DrP
11 hours ago, HunterCordell said:
i can to do exactly what the original post describes. However, this post taught me that the feeling can be manifested into physical warmth and directed to a specific part of the body... which I can also validateIsn't this just focusing your attention on what you are feeling in a specific part of your body though? Couple that with the brilliant capacity of the human brain to imagine things and self hypnotise itself and you can feel all sorts of things. For example, if I concentrate on my toe I can feel a sensation in that... if I focus on my body and imagine a 'chi' like energy... I can feel a warmth and sensation... I can move it around too... like in tai chi.... this doesn't mean I have chi... it just means I can focus my perception upon specific places in my body. The brain and body ate extremely complex.
-
34 minutes ago, Polinski said:
Why do people believe in mathematical impossibility
aha! - that's your conceptual error... incredibly low probability does not equal zero probability... especially when talking about timeframes of many billions of years - that's a very long time.
38 minutes ago, Polinski said:There is zero possibility of hundreds of thousands of dna lines happening in the mud randomely to form the simplest protozoan
That isn't evolution of modern animals from a common ancestor though - that is closer to abiogenisis I think. There are speculations as to how it could have happened (of course no one can know as they were not there and it isn't really observable)... all require a very long time to happen. Hundreds of millions of years... which in the time frame of many billions, is obviously long enough as it clearly happened somehow or we would not be here.
-
On 3/30/2018 at 9:13 PM, tmx3 said:If I can see it, then I can do it. If I just believe it, there's nothing to it... I believe I can fly, I believe I can touch the sky!!!
"I think about it every night and day, spread my wings and fly away"
9 minutes ago, FreeWill said:I do not think so.
Neither does anyone else who is in their right mind - did you read the OP?
-
11 minutes ago, seriously disabled said:
Something cannot come from nothing.
How are you defining nothing in this statement? A lot of the first page of this thread was talking about definition and context.
What about the virtual particle pairs that pop into and out of existence? (although they obviously do not come from 'nothing'.. they do appear to. Matter moving through dimensions not bound by our 4?)
15 minutes ago, seriously disabled said:Also mathematics isn't physics.
Scientists believe that by being able to solve highly complicated mathematical equations that they are doing real physics but fact is what they are doing isn't physics.
What was Einstein's E=mC2 if it wasn't physics? It was very much maths.
16 minutes ago, seriously disabled said:Something cannot come from nothing.
To believe otherwise is to go against common reason and logic.
I am certain that there are many natural things that seem to defy common sense and logic that we do not understand. Only viewing the universe with eyes and minds that can see and think in 4 dimensions might limit us as to what we can ever know about a multi dimensional universe.
-
On 3/1/2019 at 5:20 AM, Akmose said:
the question that is important is. Is the universe and everything in it an artificial creation or a naturally occurring event?
I am getting more and more confused as to what people consider natural and un-natural. If an intelligent mind has evolved naturally... then, naturally that intelligent mind would create new things and make new things. How is something manmade not natural? If we have our intelligence 'naturally' and our intelligence leads to what some call 'un-natural' things then surely that is a mistake in understanding? It IS natural for these things that seem un-natural to occur, because naturally, an intelligent mind would invent such things.
Is Rum and Raisin ice cream natural?
This is obviously off topic - sorry - I might open a new thread if anyone wants to discuss it.
-
17 minutes ago, Thorham said:
Because it seems nonsense that something can come from absolute nothingness.
not sure anyone really claims it did... depends on how you define 'nothing' as mentioned above.
21 hours ago, Airbrush said:Just because you cannot see, detect, or define empty space, doesn't mean it is nothing. The something we can see, came out of something we cannot see.
On 3/16/2019 at 8:13 PM, beecee said:The evidence for the BB tells us that the universe evolved from a hotter, denser state at t=10-43 seconds to what we see today, 13.83 billion years later. Science/cosmology explains the formation of matter, the elements, stars, planets, galaxies etc with reasonable competency.
Before that, at this time we can only make an educated hypothesis. This is one that I believe holds promise. https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/
Why is there something rather then nothing? That's just the way the cookie crumbles.
What really needs to be defined, is what is nothing imo.
-
-
On 1/17/2019 at 10:38 PM, Amado said:
I would like to learn more about this
Muscles tense or relax to change the shape of the lens in the eye to focus on what we look at. You can choose to mis-focus and things go blurry. Anyone can do it.
https://www.aao.org/museum-eye-openers/how-does-eye-focus
-
-
Isn't this just the same as this: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/61212-strange-self-induced-feeling/?tab=comments#comment-1089398
-
22 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:
I'm not sure about other religions, however, the Judeo Christian religion prohibits them from testing their God.
...convenient that. I guess they put that rule in to avoid embarrassment. ;-)
24 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:I thought it was concluded that the people who were being prayed for were less likely to take their medicine as well? IIRC. I could be wrong.
I did say that it would be very complex and multiple trials would be needed with blinds etc... some taking meds some not, some believers some not etc. Repeated for different types of ailments.
Again - I am guessing that there could be a placebo. I had some AMAZING co-incidences crop up as answers to prayer when I was a Christian. Looking at the back of someone from across the room in a church wanting them to experience the same joy as I felt during my 'baptism in the Holy Ghost' I raised my hand like a priest or wizard and prayed they'd have it too... then watching them throw their hands in the air gasping for breath due to the ecstasy they are in and falling to their knees in tears of joy... happened a few times - like zapping someone with power... although - this happens all the time in churches so it could have been a co-incidence that they emoted and dropped at the same time I projected my love at them. They were probably praying for that feeling. That - or there may be some connection between us - I can't explain the Holy Ghost... A video from Derrin Brown gave some good suggestions I saw once where he gave an atheist the same experience as baptism in the holy ghost... so I am guessing it is a state of body and mind.
-
14 hours ago, zapatos said:
Actually I believe they found that those who knew they were being prayed for did worse than those who did not know they were being prayed for. They suspected it had something to do with high expectations. Other than that I believe the study found there was no benefit to prayer.
That is interesting. Although do we know who the test subjects were? Although this is more assumption from me I would think it is very complex and you could run the experiment 20 times with different results. There are so many variables. Are the prayed for believers or non believers? What are their expectation for the prayer to be considered positive. What are they praying for? (relief from a minor ailment or raising from the dead)
-
1 hour ago, Strange said:
Except, you are not focussing on it. That is why it is blurry.
I'm sure everyone can do it with practice.
Everybody?
I would assume everyone can do it. I haven't done it since I was an infant. I used to all sorts of weird things as a child. I think children explore things like that. I can't think why it would be useful to an adult though.
-
50 minutes ago, Silvana said:
There have been studies trying to prove whether or not payers work
I assume they concluded that there was a placebo effect? I also assume that 'the faithful' would have a slight increase of perceived positive answers to prayer based on further placebo through stronger belief and maybe a touch of Pareidolia with some good old wishful thing and maybe some misunderstanding of probability? What did they find?
-
42 minutes ago, Phi for All said:
Every Aes Sedai and Aiel had to have a full name and background, as well as all the leaders and representatives of all the lands. If a character spoke, they had a full bio sheet, and I didn't feel it was always necessary.
Totally agree. I had a problem with the first book... when Mat and Rand travel from tavern to tavern you get a FULL description of every bar down to the shading on the curtains... fine for one or 2... but after the 5th tavern they stay in, after flirting with the bar maids, getting chased off by darkfriends, playing the flute and juggling for their supper, eating some bread and cheese... you think, come on, get on with it! lol. Although!!! saying that - it all makes sense in book 2 when pretty much everyone they met from all of those inns on their travels turn up at Tar Valon to train to be Aeis Sedi or end up fighting in one of his armies or something as they are both taverian (or however it is spelt). Loved the girls introduction to the white tower in book 2 and the introduction of the Senscean. Great story.
45 minutes ago, Phi for All said:I think the series got away from Jordan towards the end of his life. He had so many fans, and so many awesome characters and plot lines to work with, it must have been insane trying to tie it all up and end it. I think Sanderson did a great job with the last 3 (?) books, and kept to the spirit of the story while moving it along towards a finale that made sense and satisfied rabid fans.
He finished it beautifully imo.
...and 'the last battle' which went on for weeks was very well done. The duels with Demandred were brilliant and that bit when Elayne Trackand charges that trollock with her sword was great - it even bought a tear to my eye, soppy git that I can be. Welled up at several places actually.
-
10 minutes ago, Phi for All said:
That's a LOT of books, congratulations. And it was Brandon Sanderson took up the series after Jordan's death.
It was Sanderson - thanks for correcting me- sorry. Have you read any of it? Full of incredibly strong female characters (Aies Sedi in particular) - it's awesome.
44 minutes ago, Phi for All said:Brandon Sanderson
Argg... I started a thread to see if anyone had read it and was willing to talk about it... Can you change the title for me please? I guess I should have spelled checked his name from google rather than putting it up from memory. Thanks.
45 minutes ago, Phi for All said:That's a LOT of books,
It's a lot of pages per book and words per page too! lol. Worth it though.
-
-
On 9/15/2018 at 11:53 PM, Strange said:
There is no evidence for these things and, arguably, there cannot be evidence for gods.
If 'god' appeared in the sky or on the telly and demonstrated his power by giving us a demonstration that it was god... wouldn't that be 'evidence' of that god?
(Not saying it would be 'proof' as it could easily be staged or faked.. but it would e considered evidence no?)
Similarly - I expect people take what appear to be answers to prayers to be evidence.... although when it is broken down and assessed then prayer answers come into the realms of standard probability... but some would consider it evidence (albeit poor).
On 9/15/2018 at 11:53 PM, Strange said:Although it can show that some of the things that gods are supposed to have done did not actually happen.
Clearly.
9 minutes ago, Strange said:Quite.
A quick search found zero results for noise from a simulation of a Bose Einstein Condensate. So I can't even begin to guess what input source you used. And I cannot imagine what sort of "common algorithm" would turn noise into a synthesised instrument.
and surely there would be a better way to reveal your presence than making some harmony in some random background noise.... lol. It reminds me of the crickets singing in slow motion hoax that was about a few years back.... all the spiritulists and god lot on social media went crazy about it. Cute though it was... it was total bunk.
-
1 minute ago, Silvestru said:
Haha funny but suspicious in the same time DrP. Or should I call you Dr. Peerless!?!
lol - you're over thinking it. Although I have been called 'Dick' before - it is not my name.
-
This true story came to mind earlier for some reason - thought I'd share it as it still makes me chuckle:
Nearly 30 years ago I did work experience in an Analytical lab for quite a big firm that had a research lab, QC lab, Analytical lab and many other facilities. The rather old guy I worked for there was head of the Analytical department and was called Richard Peerless. He was a great old guy and I really respected him, so did everyone else. He was very encouraging to me and to all who worked for him. At the time the Human resource dept were making people were ID badges... I think they must have been toying with him a little when they put a little too many abbreviations on his badge - he wasn't impressed that it simply said on it: "Dick P - Anal Chemist".
This still tickles me now.
Can anyone come up with a better legend for my meme?
in The Lounge
I was quite pleased about making this meme.... but no one I know gets it.lol. I stiched the pics together and my cousin suggested the phrasing. Anyone come up with a different legend?