- Arthanari Chandrasekaran
- Chennai , Tamil Nadu
- India
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Is there anything that a human being can never possibly do?
We humans are so overwhelmed with the millions of actions that we perform everyday. We call ourselves multitaskers and have todo lists and sometimes are concerned about over todo lists being overloaded.
But there should be zillions of things that human beings can never be able to do or are incapable of doing.
We might not have thought much about them. So thinking in this new perspective might create some new connections in your brain.
All the best.
Juliette Zahn 50+
Undo an act.
Unsay a spoken word.
Unthink a thought.
Unsee what we saw.
Unhear what we heard.
Unknow what we know.
We can not reverse time.
On the bright side:
We CAN HEAL someone and something.
syed sharfuddin
This line is bore but I believe it is the ultimate truth " U can never know u could not do it, unless you failed to do it "....
syed
Deepak Shukla 500+
Gender Inequality is another issue prevalent at least in the developing societies. God knows when people will start treating each other equally.
So there are a lot of basic issues and goals that we as humans with our present attitudes might never be able to achieve..
Andrea Morisette Grazzini 30+
A human being can never know everything. And, related, a human being can never be fully flawed or, conversely absolutely perfect.
Andrea
keripik buah
Casey Christofaris 10+
adesh saxena 10+
Though we are taught that plants are lower form of life as compared to human species, ironically all the wise people in the world try or teach us, to be like a tree.
Tree
Gives only ,never takes.
Survives on minimum ,Water and minerals
Makes its own food, no dependance
Sambhav (equinamous)- free of twin opposites
Takes all the set backs and bounce back , cut it chop it - it sprouts again .
we can only try to be like a tree can never possibly attain all its qualities.
Lena Gorska 200+
Joseph Doyle
Kat Haber 500+
Dick Brown
Well actualy people would be able to do anything if they will not destroy themselves before that...
Kareem Fahim
Yep, Human Being shan't ever live in peace....
"Except for those who have believed (in One God) and done righteous deeds and advised each other to truth and advised each other to patience." Al-'Asr (103:3)
Dick Brown
Today i opposed group of homophobes and all those who hated gay people, were relgious people.
I don't need a book to justify what is good and what is bad.
Religion is selfish.
Kareem Fahim
I do believe in one God/Allah/The Creator/The Merciful. All wars are started by people, who manipulate minds of others using religions, to obtain resources or power. I respect my fellow human beings regardless of their sexuality (which is a personal matter). I do oppose homosexuality in the same way I oppose shamelessness pop culture is pouring on our young minds. And I do consider myself religious. The Book contains ultimate guidance for all humanity.
Religion asks you to be unselfish.
Dick Brown, have you ever read Quran? Do you know what Islam is about?
Joe Gac
Religion is too broad of a discussion. For example, Satanism and Catholicism are two religions, but are of opposite ends. Putting them into one category would be insanity!
Jade Thomaz
Pabitra Mukhopadhyay 30+
One thing that a human being can never possibly do is to change the physical laws of nature. And, interestingly, another thing that a human being can never possibly do is to stop aspiring for achieving something seemingly impossible and succeed to achieve it through innovation, industry and technology.
I am deliberately avoiding the spiritual undertone of your question.
Arthanari Chandrasekaran
Hence no human being on this planet can ever be able to achieve things that are naturally impossible.
Pabitra Mukhopadhyay 30+
Juliette Zahn 50+
Un-harming would require turning back time.
However, on the bright side, we can heal it / them .
♥ ♥
Arthanari Chandrasekaran
Juliette Zahn 50+
Human beings can never possibly un-harm someone or something they have harmed.
It doesn't matter how much more technology we have or how skillful we get in 'multi tasking', what matters is the harm we bring to someone, or the harm that we cause to be brought to them.
While technological advancements are meant to facilitate living, more technology can enable a greater harm. One example now is the increased injuries and deaths from texting auto drivers.
You can hear how Einstein felt and what he said on the topic at;
http://www.ted.com/talks/krista_tippett_reconnecting_with_compassion.html?c=600790
♥ ♥
Valentin Poussou
-(Teamwork is also an important question about this ; we often say that we are more than the sum of our components). (if working together)-
So my question would be : Is human capacity to reach it's objectives limited in it's essence ?
I think this is the real question because it puts aside the : "what if I wanted to create a flying spider elephant. Now that's impossible right ?"
Now to me the real thing is about our own limitations, Human ones more than environmental. At the human scale, the one of a life.
And I think we are not limited by ourselves, I have that faith that human will can overcome human problems. That in the strictly Human field : the mind, we are not limited.
But our environment limits us and we have to accept it in order to make our objectives from impossible, to unlikely, to reachable, to fullfilled ; in our minds, because that is that is important.
Sure enough we should not give up our most "crazy" projects because we are being told they're impossible, enough stories prove that, but reevaluating the way we want to get there makes our objective go from one step to the other.
Thanks.
Val.
walter crockett
Sean Brother
Rafi Amin 20+
Vincenzo Sergi
Mirian Bethancourt
Manos Baltzakis 10+
John Moonstroller 30+
Yes Richard. I've read them in thier entirity. You write good english, by the way. You appear to be a very interesting young man/lady?. Brash, curiouse and challanging. As to your talents, I know nothing. I have read your profile.
Richard, this is where my head is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation
Perhaps you could help me out. Norbert Wiener, Richard Feynman and Dirac are a bit complex at times and both Dirac and Feynman, can be a bit showy with their talent. I lack the immediate genues to understand in short periods of time, but over time I can understand their implications. These forumualtions have to do with the idea of intgrating potential particle paths in the quantum relm, by summing the historyical paths a particle could take from poistion A to B. Of course, infinity posses some limits on how many histories we can sum but we can, by taking into account the extream minutness of particles and energy, limit the number of histories to get a good approximation. Neithier Feynman nor Dirac take this approuch. It is something I'm tinkering with.
I'm curentlly having to refresh my calculs just to follow along. I also admit, I'm a bit lost here.
My email is listed so we could bear the other members the bordeum of our conversation by continuing it in email.
John Moonstroller.
Elizabeth Gu 30+
We do see a lot of miraculous happenings around the world, but we also acknowledge that quite often those are beyond our understanding.
If the things—could be anything—which have been enabling us to do something no longer work in us, that would be the key point of answering this question.
By "a human being", I think you mean more than just a person.
It’s not merely about what a person is really capable of right now.
We, humans are not just on our own, ironically.
(fyi, I don't want you to take this the wrong way. I'm not talking about some religious opinion. I hope you understand what I mean)
John Moonstroller 30+
Excellent point Richard. Matter anti-matter cancels each other. But this is implying that the sum of all matter anti-matter particles equals zero. Before they can be summed, they have to exist. 0 would imply either they never existed or the summation equals zero. Without some kind of after effect, we would never know.
Black holes exist but inside, there is no math nor physics that can describe the conditions there. Black holes were created from per-existing matter, so let's assume that all matter anti-matter particles existed before cancellation.
From whence came the matter with opposite compositions such that they cancel and is there any energy produced by this cancellation, which would imply incomplete cancellation, leaving evidence of a one sided summation event?
Before any reaction can take place,the elements of the interaction must exist. We are right back to whence came the elements? The whole of the math of the current class of physics we study is based on the assumption that the egg came before the chicken. There is no math where something is created out of nothing. The closet I can come is to suggest that something has always existed.
Ponder this Richard: "What is a force without something to act upon?" Can a force even exist without something to generate it? If the sum of all forces equals zero,does this imply they don't or never existed?
Richard Krooman 50+
Why do they have to exist? If none of them exist the sum would still be 0. You don't need particles to have the sum of them be 0.
This is what I meant when I said (in my origional post) 5 - 5 = 0.... So take 5 particles + 5 anti-particles = 0.
So why can't you have 0... and then split it to 5 and -5?
There is no law of physics against that. Also no math to prove me wrong.
The only thing that can be wrong is causality.... we have the idea that something must split the 0 into 5 and -5. However there is no proof of any of that.
Also I never seen a black hole... and I've never attempted to describe the physics. But Stephen Hawking has made a carreer out of reasoning about them. Perhaps you should ask him?
Your point being that I don't know everything about physics/math/the world... is a silly argument because nobody knows everything.
And I don't get your "The whole of the math of the current class of physics we study is based on the assumption that the egg came before the chicken.". It kinda tells me that you have no idea what math really is (language). Also physics doesn't assume that anything came before something else. It merely describes how things change in a way such that we can predict what will happen.
"Ponder this Richard: "What is a force without something to act upon?" Can a force even exist without something to generate it? If the sum of all forces equals zero,does this imply they don't or never existed?"
How the &*%^#$ should I know? But that I don't know it doesn't mean anything.
Nobody knows....
Although it appears that in nature a force always has a counter force going in an opposite direction (on some axis... be it electrical charge / speed / whatever). So perhaps everything is a force... and perhaps 0 was magically split.
John Moonstroller 30+
They exist so you and I will have something to talk about. :)
"This is what I meant when I said (in my origional post) 5 - 5 = 0.... So take 5 particles + 5 anti-particles = 0." ~RK
There is a big difference between your 5-5 = 0 and my 1 + 0 = 1. It's the apples and oranges thing.
Before you can use the number 5, you have to justify where it came from.
Look at this again. "if in the beginning you have nothing 0" you only have the set of all things with one element in it. To create another element, you have to have the number 1 in the set. 0 + 0 = 0 but 1 + 0 = 1, continuing: 1 + 1 = 2.... 1 + n, where n = infinity. < notice this: infinity.... eternity... This is the implication.
Chicken and the Egg. One child has two parents...... all the way back to the first two parents, but where did they come from? The ancients conjered up God as an answer. Evolution teaches us the the first parents were chemicals and the forces of nature, which makes sense and does away with God.
But, where did the chemicals come from, which puts God back in the picture, but answers nothing because where did God come from?.
We can break it down till we have only one element to work with. Because 0 + 0 = 0 (nothing) we have to use 1 because 0 + 1 = 1 and ... 1+1 ... 1 + n = infinity...
The only way we can put 1 in the picture is to allow that 1 has always existed and there never was a time when nothing existed.
We can't multiply because 0 X [n] = zero.
And this is the end of this conversation RK.... Good luck.
Richard Krooman 50+
And although I agree on there being infinity and eternity etc... your arguments for them are so wrong.
If in the beginning we have 0... and we want to get to 1... we can split the 0 into -1 and 1.
That way we end up with a 1.
And there are infinite ways to split 0... because you can even split it in -inf and +inf.
You should be able to explain where your 1 comes from... while I'm only forced to show that if the universe works this way 0 is always maintained.
John Moonstroller 30+
0/n = 0.
zero divided into infinit pieces still = 0.
Now divide (0 + 1/n) and let n = infinity. How many pieces do you get?
As far as I know, it's the only argument for eternity. Join physicsforum.org
See how crazy crazy can be.... :)
Richard Krooman 50+
Have you even read my posts?
Because I don't think so.
Slim Chance
Be objective.
Know the future.
Read the mind of another.
Turn back time.
Find certainty.
Avoid pain.
Look in the Face of God.
This is a quick list. Kind of silly, we know that they can't be done, but pretty well universally keep trying anyway.
I almost forgot, we will never "win the War on Drugs," eliminate poverty, or end crime.
Finally, the thing that humans will never be able to do... is to know their limits.
Maxa Jean Aimé