Official Outer Limits/Debunking Thread

[masque de Z]

Is anyone debating that you can get all you need with simply 2 lit of juice of various things per day?

Has anyone researched what happens if you start "eating" like that? Basically you get all your nutrients and calories in a drink or 2. You may also try to make it tasty to avoid the discomfort. What is the effect of such "diet" long term?

Also what on earth is the point of the thread? What are we debating here? Its impossible to live without food. We need nutrients and energy to sustain an avg power of 100W (brain alone 25W). When a human being is lifting 200 kgr in some olympics event to about 2 m height within 1-2 seconds the power demand instantaneously is about 2-4k Watts. So i assume our body uses 100W on avg but can experience a surge of 1000 W easily for most of us maybe even 5k for few.

The point is we need energy and nutrients. Forget about bs hypotheticals, this is no longer the case. You are no longer human if this happens. But even machines need energy to process information. A computer that has AI as a human being will definitely need as much power as we do anyway. I do not see that improving dramatically any time soon. Your PC takes 100w average as well (goes to 300+ even) . The smartest most compact smart system will not manage to exist for less than 100 any time soon and approximate a human being in its full range of capacities. Nature took billions of years to get here.

So what is the point of the thread? We can engineer ourselves eventually as transhumans and take energy from waves and have eventually chemical reactions inside like the plants etc. But why??? To do what with that? This is how an advanced AI machine will likely need to work out if sent in an alien world (imagine an improved rover 1K years from now). It will have to use local resources to power and fix/improve itself efficiently (can you imagine a machine that gradually builds itself further using code?). Is the point of the thread to ask what would happen to humans if they didnt have to spend 1 hour per day to cook, 0.25 hour to gather food , 1 hour to eat and 0.25 hours to clean say a total of 2.5 hours per day devoted to food (well maybe also a mix of other side activities similarly like getting the news, light multitasking etc ) if you average over all needed aspects and have nobody to do them for you? Well we know the answer here. Many people have "slaves" to cook for them or wives or whatever. They do not exactly jump out as massive winners in our world in terms of the way they use that 2-3 hours gained? But for some of them i can imagine getting an edge if they are not aholes. Why exactly do you think as a kid you have the ability to study for so many hours when all else is provided for you. Now go and thank your parents one more time please.

Is the thread asking what humans can gain if their food is prepared and delivered fast and consumed fast ie in liquid form to save 2-3 hours per day? Thats about all the purpose of the thread i can see here. I view food as a relaxing satisfying part of the day. It serves many vital functions and satisfying the brain too. It has many purposes. I envision a world that the pleasure will still remain but it will not require preparation as today, time will be saved and the result in damaging your body will be minimal while offering the best nutrients and overall balance and repair functions in a very tasty and satisfying manner. There is nothing wrong with being human.

As a side info, the human skin is about 1.5-2 m^2. So if you were half dressed and used 25% of the skin to absorb solar energy at 30% efficiency you would still not get enough energy!!! Not even 25% of our needs using ambient light. This is something to think about!

[Mt.FishNoob]

Didn't know where to post this..

All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.

Max Planck. I found this quote and it reflects my own logic. Which people do not take so seriously. SO I'm wondering what you guys think of htis quote seeing as it is from a renowned scientist.

[atakdog]

If it's taken out of context, which I would guess is the case, then I'd need to see it in context.

The quotation standing on its own is idiotic.

[Mt.FishNoob]

As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such.

is the sentence before.

Das Wesen der Materie [The Nature of Matter], speech at Florence, Italy (1944) (from Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797)

well that is where it is from. I don't know much German... will look for the translated speech. (having difficulty)

I don't see any way it could be different to what I logically deduce myself. concious universal mind = god

[atakdog]

If that's what it means, then it's stupid.

Smart people sometimes say stupid things. So do you. It's not news.

[Mt.FishNoob]

Ever considered that you maybe stupid for not understanding it's logic? Maybe you apply the stupid label to any paradigm which does not follow the model of your own development. I'm just wondering if I DID take it out of context. Surely some people here know this Max person pretty well on an intellectual level.

[atakdog]

The statement is stupid because of the words "We must assume..." It's begging the question and he almost certainly knows it.

No, we needn't assume it. Assuming it wouldn't even be helpful, and it isn't anything like the simplest explanation; in fact, the simplest explanation is exactly its opposite, that behind [whatever] there is no conscious mind.

In this forum, it's merely a stupid statement. Over in RGT you can get away with it.

[Mt.FishNoob]

that behind [whatever] there is no conscious mind.

This explains nothing, only creates an x which cannot be solved. The assumption he makes is the only possible conclusive destination. I think he realised this. There are just problems with the words 'concious' and 'mind', because we think of these concepts relative to our own concious and mind which is incapable of understanding by default.

Anyway are there other renowned scientists to have said or deduced similar? I know there is a metaphorical element and even Einstein used it... but by that same default that is all possible.

[Zeno]

Originally Posted by atakdog

If that's what it means, then it's stupid.

Smart people sometimes say stupid things.

Very Important Point.

And then ignorant fools attach meaning(s) to them to fit their own ill-conceived ideas or pre-concieved notions, usually to bolster some idiotic claim.

Think cold fusion as a prime example - or Deepok Chapra - the eternal charlatan (heir and descendent of Mary Baker Eddy and Madame Blavatsky)

[Mt.FishNoob]

I have not attached meaning, it is pretty clear what he says. As dumb certain people think my logic is and how smart they think they are I get some comfort from this sort of quote.

[Zeno]

Originally Posted by Mt.FishNoob

I have not attached meaning, it is pretty clear what he says. As dumb certain people think my logic is and how smart they think they are I get some comfort from this sort of quote.

This says a lot more than you think it does.

So if Paul Dirac misspeaks you lap it up like a dog going after vomit. Of course, most go after poor old Albert, better to wear the mantle of the most well known genius.

Real wisdom comes from realizing how much you don’t know and maintaining a rational skepticism about the world and especially all the hooey disseminated by the charlatans and demagogues that inhabit it - In addition to realizing how credulous most are and how easy is the path of self-delusion. This is at least a good start. There is much more that needs said..............but I leave that to others.

[Mt.FishNoob]

Originally Posted by Zeno

This says a lot more than you think it does.

So if Paul Dirac misspeaks you lap it up like a dog going after vomit. Of course, most go after poor old Albert, better to wear the mantle of the most well known genius.

Real wisdom comes from realizing how much you don’t know and maintaining a rational skepticism about the world and especially all the hooey disseminated by the charlatans and demagogues that inhabit it - In addition to realizing how credulous most are and how easy is the path of self-delusion. This is at least a good start. There is much more that needs said..............but I leave that to others.

People also hear alot more than what is said.

I haven't claimed any knowledge in this area, it is a logical deduction like 1-1=0 or 1/0 = infinity (I do not know of 0 or infinity, I only know of 1 and assume or invent 0 and infinity- as does you and everyone), one of which I made 'independently' but still see similarities in so many other people/philosophies (just worded or adpated differently) apparently even Nobel prize winning scientists share the same logical deduction. Why?



I do not find it pleasing to me especially, the removal of dissonance is comfortable which I accept is also found through agnosticism. You do not appear to realise that it is still agnosticism due to defaults related to the god concept. i.e omniscient omnipotence. I assume it, I daren't define it or describe it or state I know of it. I can't see it but HAVE to assume it is there. I can theorise what and how- but remain agnostic- because the what and how has so many possibilities. BUt for this 'behind everything' there is only one. So that's why I think he said that quote. I am intereseted in others opinions on why and also who else has worded such... not 'smart people say stupid things' = 'I have the right to call a statement stupid without considering the possibility of my own stupidity'. You should be aware of your own hypocrisy in the wisdom lecture.

[Acemanhattan]

Originally Posted by Mt.FishNoob

...1/0 = infinity...

Just an observation, 1/0 is undefined, not infinity.

[PairTheBoard]

Originally Posted by Zeno

This says a lot more than you think it does.

So if Paul Dirac misspeaks you lap it up like a dog going after vomit. Of course, most go after poor old Albert, better to wear the mantle of the most well known genius.

Real wisdom comes from realizing how much you don’t know and maintaining a rational skepticism about the world and especially all the hooey disseminated by the charlatans and demagogues that inhabit it - In addition to realizing how credulous most are and how easy is the path of self-delusion. This is at least a good start. There is much more that needs said..............but I leave that to others.

Madame Blavatsky was hot.



I thought that needed to be said.

PairTheBoard

[||.||.||]