Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
ok Dingus... I'm not sure who created the robot, since I'm not sure which robot, but since I know so few robot builders I'd have to say, and this is me personally, that I don't know who created the robot.
For the universe, I'd have to say that I do not know the details of its creation, if creation is the correct word to use. I don't know what 74% of the universe that we are aware of is made of, I just know it is there because of its gravitational effects. And while there are many different possible explanations, I don't know which one of those is correct, or if any of them are.
I don't know why there is geometry. It would seem that it is "created" as is, but maybe there is a reason for 3 space and 1 time dimension, wouldn't it be a kick to understand that... but I don't know what the answer is. I'm thinking now it has to do with quantum mechanics... but then who "created" quantum mechanics... and on and on.
Come to think of it, where ever did I get the idea that I could understand this stuff? who created that?! I don't know. Perhaps it is just my arrogance.... but then, where did that come from?
Probably better just to leave this stuff lay here and get on with my humble daily toil... how could I ever know?
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
In regard to some of the earlier posts, there is no such thing as natural selection!
Does the track at a track meet select who will win a running race? No! Does the field select the winning team? No! Nature is like the track or field in that it provides a field for competition and affects the outcome without making any choice at all. Nature does not decide who will win. The winner just wins because it is faster, stronger, better, than the other contestants. It was a mistake to ever create the term "Natural Selection."
On the other hand, "Survival of the Fittest" is a very appropriate term and is what should be the topic of discussion.
As for us meatbots needing a designer, that is just an ignorant viewpoint of those that do not understand theory of evolution. The best way to describe the designer of us, and all life on earth, is to to say that we ourselves design ourselves through experimentation where we only keep the options that provide for better success at breeding than the options that don't provide that. Even using the word "keep" is wrong since we don't keep anything, the versions of us that are generated with lesser options simply die out with less offspring resulting in those lesser options being removed from "gene pool".
We are after all, just a mechanism for our chemicals (DNA, etc...) to reproduce. Nothing more.
Dave
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
Why, is there offwidth?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
ok Ding, we've had this on the list for a while now... I'm in recovery phase and should be off of Injured Reserve this spring...
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 9, 2010 - 08:57pm PT
|
So Rob_James responded: "And please share. If we were to be robots, what comes next....?" So I have my ideas, but what are yours?
As science and engineering savvy advances even more in the 21st century to show that life is at base physics and chemistry, mechanisms of action and such... that mind-spirit is a product of the brain to control body and behavior-- where does that leave us?
Was the poet Matthew Arnold right when he said that modernity (in other words, the scientific era) is caught between two worlds, one dead and the other powerless to be born? Or was he wrong? and can humanity (H. sapiens) build afresh (new meaning and a new belief system) on top of this new understanding of the world and ourselves.
RectorSquid: What does it matter whether the mechanism is called Natural Selection or Survival of the Fittest? Both terms have their pros and cons it seems to me. Which is why context is important. Which is why it's important to understand all aspects of evolutionary theory.
Brian, if you're still out there: you owe me a definition-- what you meant by "eliminative." Pipe in...
Augh, Ding: You accused me of dodging the question-- again-- but you keep missing an essential point. One doesn't need to have all the infinite answers to all the infinite questions one could ask (this year's favorite seems to be: Why is there something instead of nothing?) to try to make sense of how THIS world works. And all our high-performance engineering products are real-time, real-world proof that science is a powerful investigative tool that REALLY works and the sciences lately, together, have been showing (you should be willing to admit) that living things-- everything from e.coli to cheetah to human being is a organic mechanism (or organic robot, if you prefer). That's all I opened with. So I really don't think that deserved the...
"Modern science has it all figured out eh.... hahahahahahahahahaha!"
response you gave. Just sayin.
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Hagerman, ID
|
|
Quoting WBraum:
“’Dawkins, all he does now is argue.’"
“This means he's become insane”
I assume that applies to all us that argue-----but I don't do it for 49 posts in a row.
Then again when highfructosecornsyrup first appeared on the taco two days ago: "its" first posts were pro-Walmart.
Does "it" work for WalMart??? Or is there a social agenda that "it" will reveal.
Yes! How the the flick does this thread relate to climbing?
Pilgrim! Go scan some photos and write a climbing story we can admire!
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 9, 2010 - 09:43pm PT
|
Fritz, go occupy another thread. I'd suggest one of those political ones. Lots of meaningful traction over there.
If I have it right, this is a climbers' forum, not a climbing forum. Yes?
What do you have to say about the ghost in the machine? Anything?
By the way, (a) I AM a Walmart advocate, I was sick with a head cold a couple of days ago and it was nice having a Walmart pharmacy right there on my way home that charged me just $5.00 for a prescription. But that's another thread. (b) I didn't get your quote of Brawny at all. Care to be a little clearer? He was alluding to Dawkins, I believe, and sure, Dawkins is arguing a lot for the field he's passionate about-- to make up for all those "girly scientists" out there who don't want to involve themselves. In the interest of science literacy... Rock on, Dawkins!
Fritz, I do like your pics. And I enjoyed your cartoon. For what's it worth.
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jan 10, 2010 - 12:23am PT
|
But something, somewhere, somehow, set all this in motion.
You could be wrong about that.
On a larger scale than this particular universe there may be no limits to time or space.
If our surroundings are infinite, good luck using your intuition on that.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 10, 2010 - 10:52am PT
|
My name is Nexy.
I am an MDS robot. MDS stands for mobile, dextrous, social. I was a guest on CBS Sunday Morning this morning. Did you guys get a chance to see me?
I am social because I can communicate in many of the ways that people (robots) do. I can tell you that I’m sad, mad, confused...
...excited...
or even bored just by moving my face...
But I hope you can see
that I am really happy to have met you.
Take care, now.
And Climb On! (as soon as this weather improves, eh?)
|
|
bc
climber
Prescott, AZ
|
|
|
Jan 10, 2010 - 05:09pm PT
|
Karl, But something, somewhere, somehow, set all this in motion. Who designed the robot?
We can posit a creator, but where did it come from? Who created it? This is the infinite turtles theory (see quote). Is there a First Cause, a Prime Mover? Not sure. If there is, need it be intelligent or complex or still in existence?
The most widely known version appears in Stephen Hawking's 1988 book A Brief History of Time, which starts:
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever", said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
The suggested connection to Russell may be due to his 1927 lecture Why I Am Not a Christian. In it, while discounting the First Cause argument intended to be a proof of God's existence, Russell comments (with an argument not relevant to modern Hindu beliefs):
If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument. It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, "How about the tortoise?" the Indian said, "Suppose we change the subject."
Edit: Thought I'd add this
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. Carl Sagan
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 10, 2010 - 09:01pm PT
|
Is there a "Karl" who posted to this thread? I don't remember doing so.
I hate those robots that skim the net to suck up spam email victims
Peace
Karl
|
|
climbingjones
Trad climber
grass valley,ca
|
|
|
Jan 10, 2010 - 09:46pm PT
|
You dont want to solve scientific illiteracy do you? That would blow the whole "global warming" thing out of the water. They want you all as dumb as you are.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 14, 2010 - 12:23pm PT
|
Agreed.
Thomas Huxley (Darwin's "bulldog") said it more than a hundred years ago:
(1) The idea that life works through matter but is independent of it (which is what WBraun suggested he believes) is old-world bunk.
(2) It's an idea we shouldn't give in to, it is an idea humans, because of their great adaptability and strength, can get past, even though it's been institutionalized by cultures, religious systems. It just takes time.
I believe it, too, we can get past it.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jan 14, 2010 - 12:32pm PT
|
Life works through matter but is independent of it is a bonfide scientific proven fact.
Nothing you say can change that. Nothing I say can change that.
All you can do is spout bullsh'it here.
You're a tiny little nobody with no real knowledge, just a pure mental speculator.
The Universe does not care for mental speculators.
Only high fructose robots speak nonsense ......
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 14, 2010 - 12:39pm PT
|
Brawny,
you're just trying to wind me up,
I thought you quit this thread.
Ecsomal theory, the idea that there is a ghost in the machine,
(the idea that life works through matter but is independent of it)
is as bogus as astrology. This is the new understanding. Now
it just needs to be institutionalized. In culture. In belief.
Which I think is underway.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jan 14, 2010 - 12:42pm PT
|
Your firmware is totally corrupted.
You are now obsolete.
You will now be sent to China for scrap metal recycling.
You're toast .....
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Jan 14, 2010 - 02:02pm PT
|
Your firmware is totally corrupted.
You are now obsolete.
You will now be sent to China for scrap metal recycling.
You're toast .....
?
I got reassembled over there.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 14, 2010 - 03:39pm PT
|
Yeah, it's hard to believe. But it's what the biophysics, biochemistry and bioengineering say. Interesting video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVvvx5HGpLg
At 1:16, it looks like a homunculus (a little man) pulling the globule along. Or could that be our "ghost" in the machine!
And we sure don't want no Monsanto crap in there mucking things up. Do we?!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!