TED Community » Alex Munroe

More About Me

I'm passionate about

I'm passionate about everything, from the physical to the intangible.

An idea worth spreading

Love is everything. you don't need church's or religion to accept love, and you just have to be true to yourself, and you'll find that everything around you will start to turn up. If you influence others along the way, you're only making the world a better place. Peace, love, and life.

Talk to me about

Your life problems, the big questions,

People don't know that I'm good at

Poetry, discerning true intentions,

My TED Story

I'm not so sure, but I know I want the opportunity to speak my part about love, life, and the implications of our past, current, and future actions on our evolution and how it effects everyone, and their perspectives on life. I really hope to get some recognition from someone, anyone with an outlet, who's willing to voice an opinion, not centered around religion, politics, or anything. Just based simply on love.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.50 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A reply on Conversation: Why?

  Aug 5 2012: How very right you are. Thank you, I am still learning to think properly in accord to the lifestyle I want. And TED has more ideas to choose from than the best of the best, and I appreciate the service, and apologize for the misuse.
• +2

  A reply on Conversation: Could life forms be defined by a single algorithm?

  Aug 5 2012: The embryo/cell splitting is a really interesting point when you think about our different races, are there minute differences in our algorithms at the beginning stages, causing the small, but obvious, differences we have in our physical structure between races? (which kind of goes with your theory that the algorithm is stored in your DNA)
  That could also just be differences in geography and where we come from, but all in all, really got me thinking.

• A comment on Conversation: Why?

  Aug 5 2012: Thank you for your comment, I had only scanned the top part of the site for terms of use. Apparently this website only deals in the physically possible, i thought this was to spread and discuss theories. Disappointed.

• A comment on Conversation: Are we heading to an inevitable end? (Hopefully not)

  Aug 5 2012: To the cans horror, the rust and weight displacement over time caused the arm slam the can down, spilling soda everywhere, and removing the can from its’ grasp.
  
  The can didn’t know what to think, it had been destroyed, but by what?
  It unknowingly brought around its own destruction, but why?
  
  It was simply the inevitability of the unknown variables by the man who thought “I’ll pick up that can,” and started writing his program.
  
  I (let me reiterate, I, as in similar to “eye” but with a different concept, personalized to MY opinion) think we are the can. The Earth is just constantly doing the same thing it always has, but it has new variables to deal with that it could have never imagined, and that perfect “pick up, put down” system is being disturbed. It’s like hitting a wall, having someone put a nail on the wall, and still hitting it. Same action, new, and much worse, results.
  
  We see the patterns, and we see the effects we are having on the patterns, but we still lack the initial purpose of the Earth(robot arm).
  
  Fortunately for us, we’re not a can, and have conscious thought, which means we have the possibility to avoid that final ultimatum, reverse the damage, clean that arm up a little, and make sure it never slams our soda all over the floor.
  
  Thank you for your time, all for theoretical personal opinions only!!! SPREAD THE LOVE :D
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Could life forms be defined by a single algorithm?

  Aug 5 2012: I watched the same video and went through the same thought process after seeing the similarities between the new medical scanners of top-down cadavers and the x-rays of the column. Perhaps an organic supercomputer creating algorithmic life was where we came from, or are we recreating naturally occurring events in nature.
  This would make sense, as I assume with the columns, you would take a simple shape, input an algorithm, and it would grow depending on how it reacts to the algorithm. So you would have a crazy range of output from large insane beasts, to the minute flobs of jelly, but that would mean something had to determine the changes in the "folding points" so that the algorithm could produce different results. That would support a creationist theory completely if it came to light. Cool thoughts!