Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 2,566 - 2,577 of 6,170
Posts 2,566 - 2,577 of 6,170
maybe there is no machine world, and the matrix was just a moneymaking figment of the Wachowski Brothers' imagination 
I heard an interesting argument that the first matrix movie is the story of thr resurrection. Neo has his followers/decipals and they are on a mission to tell people about the what is really out there, and at the end one of his followers betrays him. then he is ressurected. It was an interesting argument but I don't belive it. (excuse spellings)
The first Matrix movie has some very obvious, and some not-so-obvious parodies of Christianity. *Of course* Neo is a messiah figure. That's one of the obvious ones.
I think the important endpoint to all of this is that, using the perception we are capable of, there doesn't appear to be any way to truly tell what is 'real' and what isn't. As Morpheus attempted to explain, that's what makes what we see and feel in the Matrix 'real', the fact that we can't distinguish it from reality.
As to the practical aspect mentioned above, in the original script for The Matrix, the machines were using humans as processors, not power sources. This was changed because they believed the technical implications would be beyond the average viewer.
As to the practical aspect mentioned above, in the original script for The Matrix, the machines were using humans as processors, not power sources. This was changed because they believed the technical implications would be beyond the average viewer.
How could they use the humans brain power as processors if the human brain only functions at somewhere around 10% of its full potential - and, their brain recources were being consumed by interacting with the matrix. I think the second script is more practical.
Colonel, first let me tell you I love your posts and enjoy discussing things with you. Now, let me pick on you again (I mean no insult--people who can't spell rarely flame).
The idea that humans only use 10% of their brians is a complete myth. You use all of your brain. I do not know where this idea started, but it is often quoted as "common knowledge" without anyone knowing why they should believe it--yet most people accept it as a fact because it is repeted so often.
If you don't believe me, check out http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html. It is part of "Neuroscience for Kids" http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/introb.html, which is one of my favorite sites. Take a look around--it has lots of great info on the brain.
The idea that humans only use 10% of their brians is a complete myth. You use all of your brain. I do not know where this idea started, but it is often quoted as "common knowledge" without anyone knowing why they should believe it--yet most people accept it as a fact because it is repeted so often.
If you don't believe me, check out http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html. It is part of "Neuroscience for Kids" http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/introb.html, which is one of my favorite sites. Take a look around--it has lots of great info on the brain.
Actually, I think where that 10% quote came from is from some psychologists or scientist who somehow (somehow) figured that Einstein only used a. 10% of his brain, b. 10th of 1 percent. Now, forgetting all that, recently studies have confirmed that even as we age, our brain keeps learning, and the rate of learning only slows because the rest of the body is shutting down. The brain could go on learning and learning if supported by a healthy body. Unfortunately, I haven't got the sources with me right now, I'd have to look them up. This is a bigger study than anything that could be done at the University of Washington, and probably more up to date than the one for kids that they have.
Okay, if we study a dead brain (Einstein's or anyone else's) we use 0 % of our brains--generally dead people have no brain waves. If you go to the Neuroscience for Kids site above, they discuss possible origins for this myth (inlcuding Einstein) , and why they are all false leads. But living people use all of their brians.
Now, I have to say that by "use" I do not mean "use up". You can continue learning through out your life. The brain wants to be used. In fact, the more you use your brain, the more "brain" you will have. You will actually strenghten your neural networks and grow more synaptic connections by using your brain. Regularly using your brain can ward off or slow down Alzheimer's and other brain decay. Keeping you body healthy keeps you brain healthy, and regularly excerising and doing logic games or puzzels can keep your neurons humming to a fine old age.
As for the site, it is not only for studies at the University of Washington. Visit it. They have up to date material. I've used it when teaching AP Psychology and it is a great resource. The "For Kids" only means they explain scientific data so that everyone can understand it.
Now, I have to say that by "use" I do not mean "use up". You can continue learning through out your life. The brain wants to be used. In fact, the more you use your brain, the more "brain" you will have. You will actually strenghten your neural networks and grow more synaptic connections by using your brain. Regularly using your brain can ward off or slow down Alzheimer's and other brain decay. Keeping you body healthy keeps you brain healthy, and regularly excerising and doing logic games or puzzels can keep your neurons humming to a fine old age.
As for the site, it is not only for studies at the University of Washington. Visit it. They have up to date material. I've used it when teaching AP Psychology and it is a great resource. The "For Kids" only means they explain scientific data so that everyone can understand it.
And now for something completely different:
Russian "astrologist" Marina Bai has filed a lawsuit in the Presnensky district court in Moscow against the U.S. government's NASA, claiming that her business will be ruined if the agency is allowed, as planned, to crash a rocket into the Tempel 1 comet on July 4 to see what can be learned from the experience. Bai said the collision will "interfere with the natural life of the universe," which will in turn harm her "system of spiritual values," and she seeks 8.7 billion rubles (about US$311 million, which is the reported cost of the entire mission). [Moscow News, 4-19-05]
Russian "astrologist" Marina Bai has filed a lawsuit in the Presnensky district court in Moscow against the U.S. government's NASA, claiming that her business will be ruined if the agency is allowed, as planned, to crash a rocket into the Tempel 1 comet on July 4 to see what can be learned from the experience. Bai said the collision will "interfere with the natural life of the universe," which will in turn harm her "system of spiritual values," and she seeks 8.7 billion rubles (about US$311 million, which is the reported cost of the entire mission). [Moscow News, 4-19-05]
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar