...they get their paychecks. The only reason VA pays these idiots is to keep them from getting jobs doing actual work where they might harm someone. Sort of like the NHL.
Re:Man who mistook his wife for a hat
on
Mapping the Mind
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for the correction. That's when I read it (mid-80s). Somehow I thought it was written quite a bit earlier. (it's been nearly 20 years) perhaps because the case studies were mid-60s or 70s. Anyway, glad you liked the book too.
Re:Slightly Misleading
on
Mapping the Mind
·
· Score: 5, Informative
from a book review on Amazon:
Unfortunately, like the vast majority of modern psychology and neuroscience texts, this book suffers from the gravest of metaphysical mistakes--namely the egregiously reductionistic approach known variously as scientific materialism, positivism, physicalism, scientism, and material monism. The first line of the book summary says it all: "Today a brain scan reveals our thoughts, moods, and memories as clearly as an X-ray reveals our bones. We can actually observe a person's brain registering a joke or experiencing a painful memory." The fallacy in the first sentence should be obvious. There is absolutely no empirical device that reveals the specific content of thoughts, moods, or memories. No EEG, EOG, EMG, PET, CAT, or MRI will tell you what I'm thinking or feeling. They might tell you _that_ I'm thinking, but not _what_ I'm thinking. No empirical procedure can determine whether I'm thinking about picking up litter on Earth Day or planning a local bank heist. Thoughts, moods, and memories are _not_ revealed by a brain scan as clearly as an X-ray reveals bones. They aren't revealed at all! Thoughts, moods, and memories--unlike bones--are not physical, empirical quantities. They don't have simple location in the physical worldspace. What a brain scan detects, rather, is the objective _correlate_ of a subjective experience. A brain scan will show you what parts of the brain are involved in the experience of thinking and feeling; a brain scan will not, however, tell you the nature or content of those thoughts and feelings. What a brain scan reveals is electrochemical activity in a physical organ, not anything remotely resembling "thoughts" or "moods." To simply reduce conscious experience to brain activity is to completely obliterate it: thoughts and feelings are reduced to electricity and neurochemicals; quality is reduced to quantity; interior is reduced to exterior; subject is reduced to object; depth is reduced to surface; the heads side of the coin is reduced to the tails side; and what remains is a flat and faded one-dimensional cosmos, wherein mathematics and logic, spirituality and philosophy, art, morals, truth, and beauty are all reduced to physics and empiricism without remainder. The resultant world is, as Whitehead put it, "a dull affair, soundless, scentless, colourless; merely the hurrying of material, endlessly, meaninglessly." Scientific materialism is, therefore, the insane position of saying that empirical reality alone is the "true reality" (even though there is no empirical basis for such an assertion), and it is always self-contradictory. Carter's book expresses this viewpoint, and says, in effect, that all conscious experience is ultimately reducible to nothing but systems of biochemical activity within the physical brain and body. But if that is actually true, and that statement itself is a product of conscious experience, then it is self-denying, simply because it claims to be "true" at a level where truth and falsehood have no existence (there are no "true" biochemicals versus "false" biochemicals; there are simply biochemicals). Thus, the existence of the very idea of scientific materialism proves that scientific materialism is fundamentally incorrect.
Man who mistook his wife for a hat
on
Mapping the Mind
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Sounds similar to "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" a book written in the late 60s (or early 70s) on the a doctors experience with patients with various mental illnesses. Excellent read.
This article is rediculous. First of all, humans in space is a complete joke: there is very little of interest in space. Humans on other planets is another story.
However, while all of us dream of populating other planets, the practicality of doing so with today's technology is absurd. For example, we haven't colonized Antartica. Sure there are a few scientists living on isolated stations, but they are doing research - no intention of making the area habitable. If we can't even colonize all of the continents here on Earth, why bother with other planets. A better example is the bottom of the ocean. Why not colonize the ocean floor? It's less rediculous than colonizing the moon.
On this survival front, no scientist could possibly prove that life is safier anywhere else than on the Earth, where it has been happily plodding along for a few billion years, and so far been unobserved anywhere else.
In other words you are suggesting that the cosmic inflationary dark energy might not exist, but that its absence does not preclude the dark star dark energy from being possible. I agree this is possible. However, its not what this guy is suggesting. That said, the idea that at the "bubble horizon" there might be conditions similar to those at pre-infaltion during the big bang is interesting. The formation of a negative higgs field would lead to spacial inflation around the center of the dark star, creating an incompressible bubble.
This idea that "singularities" don't really exist has been around for a few years now. The idea is that a very small bubble forms that is unable to compress into a singularity because of the "dark energy" concept of reverse-gravity. However, the new theories that "dark energy" really doesn't exist, and that the expansion of the universe can be explained by the negative higgs field + spacetime ripples of the early inflation of the universe run contrary to this "no black hole" concept.
Great, so we get to pay taxes on online orders because some asshole stole some library books? Instead of paying the taxes, why not just shoot the jerk. Then nobody else will try it. I buy a lot of books online and they are expensive enough as it is.
Negative Higgs field solves the horizon problem. Toss in a little spacetime rippling and Negative Higgs can produce the current expansion (inflation) that we observe today.
1. Star Wars musical on broadway. 2. Star Wars VII casting call Reality TV show. 3. Star Wars vs. Raiders of the Lost Ark 4. Star Wars 3.5 - Rise of Young Jar Jar 5. Rerelease of Star Wars in Odor-vision 6. Recutting of the movies intermixing scenes from I, II, III, IV, V, VI aka what Coppolla did with the Godfather. 7. Recutting movies to get G-rating so he can take his date to the premiers.
I get it. So, you are saying that the black holes were in fact larger than the article suggested. And, that these black holes could also be used for time travel. And, that we should all applaud this Dr. Nasty for his invention of this time machine. I guess I'm just a bit confused about the Long Island bit.
I liked the dramatic flare of the popular science rendition that said "leading scientist to believe these are in fact tiny black holes, which someday could be used for time travel."
Berkley DB (XML) is great for some applications, but it lacks high availability (remote replication, clustering, etc).
Tamino seems to claim recent support for "Enterprise High Availability" but I'm not sure what that means.
Before I'd decide on XML, SQL,flat files,OODMBS, RDBMS etc, I'd want to know four things:
1. How will it be secured. 2. How will I back it up and recover it. 3. How will I replicate/mirror/cluster it locally and over distances in case of a failure/disaster. 4. Do upgrades require downtime.
Slashdot Mirror
Congratulations Starfleet Cadet on a mission accomplished! Chalk one up for the Federation and report back to your room in your parents house.
and the location will be Lot 7 at Paramount studios where they filmed the moon landings.
You can kill almost anything with the -9 switch.
...they get their paychecks.
The only reason VA pays these idiots is to keep them from getting jobs doing actual work where they might harm someone. Sort of like the NHL.
Thanks for the correction. That's when I read it (mid-80s). Somehow I thought it was written quite a bit earlier. (it's been nearly 20 years) perhaps because the case studies were mid-60s or 70s. Anyway, glad you liked the book too.
Unfortunately, like the vast majority of modern psychology and neuroscience texts, this book suffers from the gravest of metaphysical mistakes--namely the egregiously reductionistic approach known variously as scientific materialism, positivism, physicalism, scientism, and material monism. The first line of the book summary says it all: "Today a brain scan reveals our thoughts, moods, and memories as clearly as an X-ray reveals our bones. We can actually observe a person's brain registering a joke or experiencing a painful memory." The fallacy in the first sentence should be obvious. There is absolutely no empirical device that reveals the specific content of thoughts, moods, or memories. No EEG, EOG, EMG, PET, CAT, or MRI will tell you what I'm thinking or feeling. They might tell you _that_ I'm thinking, but not _what_ I'm thinking. No empirical procedure can determine whether I'm thinking about picking up litter on Earth Day or planning a local bank heist. Thoughts, moods, and memories are _not_ revealed by a brain scan as clearly as an X-ray reveals bones. They aren't revealed at all! Thoughts, moods, and memories--unlike bones--are not physical, empirical quantities. They don't have simple location in the physical worldspace. What a brain scan detects, rather, is the objective _correlate_ of a subjective experience. A brain scan will show you what parts of the brain are involved in the experience of thinking and feeling; a brain scan will not, however, tell you the nature or content of those thoughts and feelings. What a brain scan reveals is electrochemical activity in a physical organ, not anything remotely resembling "thoughts" or "moods." To simply reduce conscious experience to brain activity is to completely obliterate it: thoughts and feelings are reduced to electricity and neurochemicals; quality is reduced to quantity; interior is reduced to exterior; subject is reduced to object; depth is reduced to surface; the heads side of the coin is reduced to the tails side; and what remains is a flat and faded one-dimensional cosmos, wherein mathematics and logic, spirituality and philosophy, art, morals, truth, and beauty are all reduced to physics and empiricism without remainder. The resultant world is, as Whitehead put it, "a dull affair, soundless, scentless, colourless; merely the hurrying of material, endlessly, meaninglessly." Scientific materialism is, therefore, the insane position of saying that empirical reality alone is the "true reality" (even though there is no empirical basis for such an assertion), and it is always self-contradictory. Carter's book expresses this viewpoint, and says, in effect, that all conscious experience is ultimately reducible to nothing but systems of biochemical activity within the physical brain and body. But if that is actually true, and that statement itself is a product of conscious experience, then it is self-denying, simply because it claims to be "true" at a level where truth and falsehood have no existence (there are no "true" biochemicals versus "false" biochemicals; there are simply biochemicals). Thus, the existence of the very idea of scientific materialism proves that scientific materialism is fundamentally incorrect.
Sounds similar to "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" a book written in the late 60s (or early 70s) on the a doctors experience with patients with various mental illnesses. Excellent read.
This article is rediculous. First of all, humans in space is a complete joke: there is very little of interest in space. Humans on other planets is another story.
However, while all of us dream of populating other planets, the practicality of doing so with today's technology is absurd. For example, we haven't colonized Antartica. Sure there are a few scientists living on isolated stations, but they are doing research - no intention of making the area habitable. If we can't even colonize all of the continents here on Earth, why bother with other planets. A better example is the bottom of the ocean. Why not colonize the ocean floor? It's less rediculous than colonizing the moon.
On this survival front, no scientist could possibly prove that life is safier anywhere else than on the Earth, where it has been happily plodding along for a few billion years, and so far been unobserved anywhere else.
If we can't survive here on Earth, our chances somewhere else are worse.
Geek for a really good investment idea.
In other words you are suggesting that the cosmic inflationary dark energy might not exist, but that its absence does not preclude the dark star dark energy from being possible. I agree this is possible. However, its not what this guy is suggesting. That said, the idea that at the "bubble horizon" there might be conditions similar to those at pre-infaltion during the big bang is interesting. The formation of a negative higgs field would lead to spacial inflation around the center of the dark star, creating an incompressible bubble.
This idea that "singularities" don't really exist has been around for a few years now. The idea is that a very small bubble forms that is unable to compress into a singularity because of the "dark energy" concept of reverse-gravity. However, the new theories that "dark energy" really doesn't exist, and that the expansion of the universe can be explained by the negative higgs field + spacetime ripples of the early inflation of the universe run contrary to this "no black hole" concept.
What is the difference between this thing and an Athlon?
If your plan was to make Kull the Preparer cry... mission accomplished.
Repost of the first six other stupid April 1st stories.
Great, so we get to pay taxes on online orders because some asshole stole some library books? Instead of paying the taxes, why not just shoot the jerk. Then nobody else will try it. I buy a lot of books online and they are expensive enough as it is.
Negative Higgs field solves the horizon problem. Toss in a little spacetime rippling and Negative Higgs can produce the current expansion (inflation) that we observe today.
If it's gunna be about sports it should be about Georgia Tech or something...
1. Star Wars musical on broadway.
2. Star Wars VII casting call Reality TV show.
3. Star Wars vs. Raiders of the Lost Ark
4. Star Wars 3.5 - Rise of Young Jar Jar
5. Rerelease of Star Wars in Odor-vision
6. Recutting of the movies intermixing scenes from I, II, III, IV, V, VI aka what Coppolla did with the Godfather.
7. Recutting movies to get G-rating so he can take his date to the premiers.
No doubt. Use that petition of names to round up those VB developers, hog tie 'em, and send them to Guantamano.
I get it. So, you are saying that the black holes were in fact larger than the article suggested. And, that these black holes could also be used for time travel. And, that we should all applaud this Dr. Nasty for his invention of this time machine. I guess I'm just a bit confused about the Long Island bit.
I liked the dramatic flare of the popular science rendition that said "leading scientist to believe these are in fact tiny black holes, which someday could be used for time travel."
It goes without saying that you could use porn to sell real estate too.
Berkley DB (XML) is great for some applications, but it lacks high availability (remote replication, clustering, etc).
Tamino seems to claim recent support for "Enterprise High Availability" but I'm not sure what that means.
Before I'd decide on XML, SQL,flat files,OODMBS, RDBMS etc, I'd want to know four things:
1. How will it be secured.
2. How will I back it up and recover it.
3. How will I replicate/mirror/cluster it locally and over distances in case of a failure/disaster.
4. Do upgrades require downtime.
Then I'd discuss the academic issues.
This could be applied to real estate and used to give "virtual tours" of homes on the market.
However, I plan on figuring out how I can embedd this into one of my Mindstorms...