Comments & Feedback

PR, You are amazing!!! Amazingly prolific... amazingly well informed... amazingly compelling... and just plain amazing!!! Pretty soon you'll have your own floor at the Library of Congress. ;-)

— MalamuteMan

Congrats on the 'NV Random Act of Vineness'.

— Jonathan-1917156

you are now in my rss reader...congratulations

— jedipunk

Daanzho!

As my brothers and sisters of the Jicarilla Apache would say to a warrior returning from a good fight. I have seen you put on your war paint my friend, and I welcome you as we fight shoulder to shoulder against the stupidity and ignorance that would take over this great land for the short term profits and fantasies of the few at the expense of the many!

Hoka Hey! Fight on, this is as good a day to die as any.

— Rainbow Warrior

Your articles and seeds are absolutely great. Keep up the good work.

— onefan51

Hey,

I totally didn't notice the two comments you left me on my page... They were waiting approval, and I wasn't aware that I needed to check such an obscure section to see them.

I'd love to help out with writing a nuclear article, if you haven't done it. (when did you make those comments btw?)

Sorry for the ridiculous delay on the response!

— K Chad Roberts

Good job on that "Dems' lame hysteria" thread. That was fun reading.

— MWeaver

RAV .... well deserved! Copy, past, frame and hang it on the wall.....

— mstanley2265

Congratulations on your RAV!

From all of us who come to the 'Vine to get smarter - thank you so much.

— CrowMeris

Congratulations on being awarded that RAV! You truly deserve the recognition. If only there were more of you! You really do epitomize what Newsvine is supposed to be.

— bitemore

Yay!! A RAV. Congratulations:):):):)

— Soph0571

Appreciate the posted website reference on AGW. Been looking for an appropriate repository and FAQ source. Enjoy your comments immensely -- nothing like actual knowledge exchange to redeem the blogosphere...

— jhoopy56

Happy Holidays!!!

— McSpocky

I'm excited to find out about the Meteor shower! I'll have to make it a point to show my daughter!

Thinking about that... I was thinking of getting my daughter (7yrs old) a basic telescope to get her interested in some sciences before she really gets into much in school. Would you have a recommendation of one (preferrably under $200). It's a thought for Christmas. A surprise... She's never asked for one. But I KNOW she'd get a kick out of it.

— MsAubrey

Thanks for your nice comments - I do appreciate them very much.

— Summer-1597193

Hey check this out (paper about Entropic Gravity).

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1001/1001.0785v1.pdf

This is probably not news to you but it was to me. What are your thoughts on it?

— Eric0038

Your welcome, I'm always trying to find like-minded individuals with which to share an intelligent conversation.

— ReyRik

Happy Labor Day. Actually I'm in school today, on my lunch break now - taking tests no less. Rediculous I know. I guess they took Labor Day to mean that we should labor away during it.

Thanks for the recommendations of reading - I haven't read Flatland, but I am familiar with some of the concepts in it.

As for whether or not we see the same "blue", we undoubtedly see slight variations in it, but I have no doubt that we both perceive "blueness" in a similar fashion - the reason being that conscious perception of qualia has to be based on some physical phenomena, defined by yet unknown laws of nature, that are universal.

Now, what is interesting to me is WHY the brain chose to associate the "blue" wavelengths as blue and not red. ie: Why isn't the subjective perception of the electromagnetic spectrum reversed? It likely isn't arbitrary, and aided in survival in some way. A clue, I think, is in animals that see dichromatically. Most dogs actually aren't fully color-blind - they're dichromats. They are red-green color blind but they perceive blue and yellow just fine. Blue (sky) and yellow (ground) create a distinctness when observing a visual scene that is important for daytime hunters - it is a distinctness that is blurred in pure grayscale vision. On the other hand, they lack the ability to see red and green because it is less important for them. It was more adaptive to fill the retina with rod cells to enhance night vision. A trade-off, if you will.

So in that example, it is clear that nature selected blue and yellow color vision in the dog to enhance distinction during the day. But why is the "sky" blue and the ground "yellow", and not the other way around? It's a question that I've thought about often in passing, and I think the answer is that if the perception of the color spectrum was reversed in the brain - it wouldn't make the sky "Yellow" and the ground "Blue", but rather it would make the sky "orange" and the ground "cyan" (although I may be wrong about that). Blue and yellow are sharper colors and a sharper distinction.

If that's the answer, hell someday maybe I'll figure out a way to write a paper on it.

Thanks for the story about Feynman - that's pretty much what I figured about his distaste for biology. However, if he delved a bit deeper he would of found that it is firmly rooted in physics. Where muscles attach near a joint, for example, is a trade off of speed for strength (torque=force x lever arm), which evolution has altered dramatically in different species.

Also thanks for the apology but it wasn't necessary! Good discussions are all in fun.

— Eric0038

PR;
Hello and greetings from "The Land of Ten Thousand Lakes" ( there are more than 18,000 actually).
Thank you for your kind note, it is nice to know that I was your first friend here on newsvine ( woohoo, I'm #1, I'm #1). I will enjoy a virtual beer with you any time.
Hope you are well and able to get some biking in.
Peace.

— Mn Man

I absolutely loved that interview - thank you. I'll for sure buy that book when I have the time. I was particularly fascinated by the concept that the net energy of the universe is zero, and thus it is not particularly a problem that "something came from nothing". That's something that I admittedly have never thought of before. Mind-bending. It calls into question the very nature of what we call reality itself, and what it means to "exist". But that's not a concept that I've ever had a problem with since I've been exposed to eastern ideas. It reminds me of the Buddhist saying "Nothing that has ever happened has ever happened".

It also reinforces my personal belief, of which I have no evidence for whatsoever, that any questions that we can pose that appear paradoxical with regards to the nature of the universe reveal that we are either thinking about the universe in terms that have no meaning, or do not understand a fundamental aspect of the universe itself. An example - "how can something come from nothing?" implies that both "something" and "nothing" exist and that they are irreconcilable with respect to each other. What if instead, the true reality is an inseparable fusion of the two, and the question has no meaning in the first place?

I still say that a true "Theory of Everything" would have to specifically predict the properties of consciousness and explain why it exists. What good is a theory of existence if it can't explain why we, subjectively, exist? lol. I suspect that the purpose of it in the universe is of some vital importance, as everything has importance, and that it must derive naturally from the laws that govern the universe. It will be interesting if someone, down the line, realizes that "the only way this theory will work is if it allows for subjective awareness".

— Eric0038

Leave a comment ...

– Show More

As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.

Stop Tracking

Back To Top