I'm just a curious college student trying to pursue knowledge.
Physics, Philosophy, Philosophy of Physics, Philosophy of Science, and anything that makes me think.
Anything
Hip Hop Dance, Bollywood Dance
This member doesn't have any favorite talks yet.
TEDCred score: +1.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: Is gravity a result of mass or size?
This is an age old analogy that I was taught:
Think of space-time like a bed sheet stretched. Now put a large ping pong ball on it. Most ping pong balls are hallow, therefore have minimal mass. How much do yyou think the ping pong ball will curve the bed sheet? Not much right?
Now put a steel bearing ball . Steel bearing balls are massive and are quite dense. How much did that steel bearing ball distort the bed sheet? By a lot right?
The same principle applies in the General Relativity conception of gravity at macroscopic scales. Of course, I have not delved into the actual mathematical frameworks of all this so cannot say for CERTAIN that I AM ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. I am a Physics student who was taught this conceptually.
A reply on Conversation: REVISING OUR HUMAN INTELLIGENCE ON A DIFFERENT SCALE. Can we augment our own perceptions and improve our mentality (not technology) ?
I like your allusion to Heisenberg. Even if we have a theory of nature as consistent as QM, we still will not understand nature fully because of our limitations, intellectually and perceptually. Scientists that say we understand everything today and are very passionate about giving a specific view in science an absoluteness are kind of being a bit naive. Every theory is probable to being falsified, it's an axiom of Science.
A reply on Conversation: REVISING OUR HUMAN INTELLIGENCE ON A DIFFERENT SCALE. Can we augment our own perceptions and improve our mentality (not technology) ?
Everybody has done this at some point, I know I've done this a LOT. It's also detrimental to those that actually have a passion for a subject but just don't have the basic knowledge needed to actually digest the information (like a High School talking about Quantum Mechanics, but doesn't have the resources to actually understand it mathematically). But that's just how it is...
As for "data smog", it's good that you've pointed that out because I've been thinking about the ramifications our data infested lives have on our brain. When I went to India to live with my Grandma for a week in the village country, my circadian rhythm reseted itself and I gained a sense of energy that I just didn't experience back in college. It was really energizing. That was because I was away from all modern technology and only had my brain to entertain me.
A reply on Conversation: REVISING OUR HUMAN INTELLIGENCE ON A DIFFERENT SCALE. Can we augment our own perceptions and improve our mentality (not technology) ?
A reply on Conversation: REVISING OUR HUMAN INTELLIGENCE ON A DIFFERENT SCALE. Can we augment our own perceptions and improve our mentality (not technology) ?
They have done Psychological studies on humans that have been imprisoned from all normal human life. These humans have been restricted of the tpyical stimuli that are imposed onto us everyday like the noise of cars, tvs, etc. It was found that without language, they weren't able to develop the intelligence to match their age. It seemed as though their mental capacities were limited to that of a child. So in that respect, if we are isolated from various stimuli and deprived of language, the development of out intelligence can be hampered to a high degree.
Just wanted to throw that out there as a reference point if needed...
I think we can evolve our mind and bodies, but perhaps only to a certain extent. I think the bloom of our collective intelligence as a society in the modern era has been greatly dependent on the fluid transfer of information to the masses. If we take that variable out then maybe our progress as a society may be hampered. However, if we construct this society such that intellectualism is considered to a high degree, then we may maximize our chances of evolving our minds and bodies. If a society is based upon the philosophy of pursuing knowledge, then I believe that society will be prosperous in evolving its minds and bodies.
A comment on Conversation: REVISING OUR HUMAN INTELLIGENCE ON A DIFFERENT SCALE. Can we augment our own perceptions and improve our mentality (not technology) ?
Therefore, it can be concluded that our collective intelligence as a global civilization has increased exponentially over the course of our human history. We are now more equipped to tackle big problems and attain better solutions because of avenues such as the internet.
If we gave more prominence to academia and not the entertainment industry, we would, in theory, have an exponential increase in the collective intelligence of our world. However, it's more "fun" to watch "Keeping up with the Kardashians" than learn how our economy works at even the basic scale or actually understand some of the concepts in Physics or any other academic subject. I am not bashing our culture, but just pointing out the consequences of making our culture more Academically or intellectually oriented.
A utopia novel I would actually read would be about such a society. A society in which academia and intellectualism are more favored culturally than more bland entertainment. That would be actually interesting to study...
A comment on Conversation: What is the difference between "To be" and "To exist"?
To exist, is merely just that--to exist. A rock can exist and things that lie in the "to be" category such as some living beings(beings that are not self aware), exist as a direct consequence of the premise "to be". "To be" logically presupposes "to exist". Can something be without it existing first***? Existence can be irrespective of any conscious beings. A realist (one who says that there is a physical world out there irrespective of our existence), would say that "to exist" means that everything can exist, irrespective of any conscious "observer".
***the counter question: can something exist, without it first "being"? You can't ask that question, as being has already been established as presupposing existence. You can't conclude that if A is a cause and B is an effect, that B comes before A, that's illogical. If anyone finds a flaw in my logic, please feel free to correct me as I am keen on improving and learning.
This is however, based on our current knowledge of the world and reality. If tomorrow, it is proved that a conscious being, such as a human directly affects the Quantum behavior of matter, then we will be forced to conclude that conscious beings are the reason of existence as the way it is, and the universe exists because of this ethereal force of consciousness. So, then only conscious beings will be in the "to be" category and will be able to influence the "to exist" category.
A reply on Conversation: Isn't it time to eliminate grades in education?
However, if we couple grades and positive feedback then the student's needs will better be delivered.
A comment on Conversation: What caused the big-bang ???
A comment on Conversation: How the Universe Operates: Why we can never live in a perfect world
As for perfection, it doesn't exist. The idea of perfection is relative not absolute thus it cannot exist as there will be an infinite number of ideas of perfection.
Now assuming that our Universe is just one of an infinite array of Universe in an infinite array of Multiverses, we can say that this world and our reality is as perfect as it could have been for us with our biological configurations and the Physics of our given Universe. So walllah! This world is as "perfect" as it gets for humans like us and all the living things in the universe that are configured the way they are.
As for your morality allegory, we are always going to be in conflict with the moral views of others, however, there does seem to be overlapping moral "laws" that seem to be innate. Good and Bad are just deviations of actions that are perceived as being either beneficial or detrimental to our society at the given time. There is not absolute state of goodness or badness---it's all a construction of human interaction. In the animal world, good is to kill prey and bad is to not kill (bad analogy but you kidna get the point). Kinda like hot and cold, they are just mere deviations of energy that we use to comprehend our reality.