Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Razor on November 11, 2002, 11:46:31 am
-
Some scientists say that we, humans use only 10% of our brain power. Then, what is the other 90% of unused powers we keep? Do we have to be gifted, or do we all allready have it? Any thoughts? Opinions?
-
Originally posted by Razor
. Then, what is the other 90% of unused powers we keep?
I'm pretty sure its all penguins :)
-
I've never been entirely clear on how they prooved only 10% of the brain was used... did they study neural firing or something?
I of course think that the mind can be used to influence the "outside world" as well as travel to other levels of conciousness.
-
Possibly. It may be possible. No forget that force thing it's not real. What about telepathy? Is that possible?
-
The other 90% is, I believe, devoted to unconsious things like breathing and digesting, memory storage, sensory input and the like. It's all being used, just not all for active thinking.
-
Originally posted by Razor
Some scientists say that we, humans use only 10% of our brain power. Then, what is the other 90% of unused powers we keep? Do we have to be gifted, or do we all allready have it? Any thoughts? Opinions?
The 10% thing is a bowdlerisation of a misquotation of a misinterpretation. Humans use 100% of their brain. The misinterpretation is based on a study of the brain that showed that approximately 10% of the brain showed high levels of activity, centered on the frontal lobes, with a secondary focus on the visual and olfactory centers. Some people have taken this to mean that we only use 10% of our brain, whereas the real meaning is that our brain operates at many different speeds/loads.
Think of it like PC hardware. The CPU runs, usually, 6 to 10 times faster than the front-side-bus on most motherboards, and anywhere from 3 to 5 times as fast as most RAM. Your brain is like that too.
-
Quite possibly. You know, the human mind really has a lot of space in it. Possibly far more than 10 big size hard discs combined, but it is just that we loose some of our memories, we can't keep them there forever.
EDIT: I was adressing GE
-
well it would be hard to equate the human mind to computer hardware becase our brains are analog, and computers are binary digital, also the structure is almost opposite with a computer there is a single central powerful procesor, in the mind there are trillions of small weak procesors wich work together.
-
Originally posted by Razor
Quite possibly. You know, the human mind really has a lot of space in it. Possibly far more than 10 big size hard discs combined, but it is just that we loose some of our memories, we can't keep them there forever.
Taking glial cells as bits, the brain has more than 12 terabytes of space. When you consider that glial cells are wired with a much greater amount of interconnectedness, rather than the two-way connections of transistors, you end up with a number that is several times that. That assumes, of course, that information in your brain is stored as "bits".
Part of the reason that you lose memories, though, is not about storage space, but about the way memories are stored and constructed. There's this idea that memories have some link to the real world, which is utterly false. Memories are like photographs seen through a fish-eye lens. The parts our internal systems consider important are at the center of the lens and are very clear (which is not to say accurate) while things toward the periphary become distorted and unrecognizable. Add in the positive feedback loop of human conciousness (wherein things we consider important become clearer, and because they're clearer, they become more important) and detail just falls away. The important thing to remember, though, is that "important" is not meant in a concious sense (elsewise, we would never forget the things we wanted to remember!), but in an unconcious, nondeterministic sense. The memory apparatus is what determines "importance", completely seperate from concious determination.
Also consider the concept of confabulation, wherein the mind builds "memories" piecemeal by combining disconnected memory fragments. It is not uncommon for adults to remember childhood events that NEVER HAPPENED. These events are a sort of photo-mosaic, a collage of memory fragments that have been knit together into a wholly realistic "memory".
-
are minds use some rather interesting compression softwar to stor things
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Think of it like PC hardware. The CPU runs, usually, 6 to 10 times faster than the front-side-bus on most motherboards, and anywhere from 3 to 5 times as fast as most RAM. Your brain is like that too.
no, don't think of it as PC hardware... the brain is faaarrr more advanced, and can't be compared to anything mechanical.
i personally think that since we're not perfect we don't use all our brain... and if we WERE perfect, then we would use more of it.
Originally posted by: GalacticEmperor
The other 90% is, I believe, devoted to unconsious things like breathing and digesting, memory storage, sensory input and the like. It's all being used, just not all for active thinking.
no, that's a totally different part of the body, it's not even part of the brain... it's connected it, but it controls unconscious things, like breathing, heartbeat, and even digesting. it's like at the back of your neck, a little up... that's why a strike in the right place stops your heart and breathing.
-
Ok! Who's the wise guy who voted for doughnuts?
-
Originally posted by Razor
Ok! Who's the wise guy who voted for doughnuts?
Me + 2 other people.
-
meh.. as much as I love facts, it seems a little drab to think that people will forever be this advanced/smart/all that good stuff
mmmmm doughnuts... ;7
wee! stealth has a new avatar!
-
Originally posted by Razor
Ok! Who's the wise guy who voted for doughnuts?
-hell no man, it wasn't me
-i haven't even voted yet
-i swear i didn't, don't you believe!?
Originally posted by: Knight_Templar
wee! stealth has a new avatar!
-now my friend Knight_Templar, what are you on?
-i don't know about you, but as for me: your mom!
-see this isn't my first, and it won't be my last
-i've got a mission to accomplish, so chill out, enjoy, laugh!
-i'm here to be helpful, work, and have fun
-if you got a bad attitude, you'll see the barrel of gun
-so stop the words coming out of your mouth
-in fact, i'm still waiting on one from the GTD Wolf.
heh, couldn't resist, sorry :p :cool:
i know you ain't hatin :D
-
Originally posted by Stealth
no, don't think of it as PC hardware... the brain is faaarrr more advanced, and can't be compared to anything mechanical.
I'm using a PC as an analogy, NOT as a direct comparison. When one considers the massively parallel nature and network-of-localised networks structure, NO you cannot compare them. Lets not confuse analogy for correlation.
i personally think that since we're not perfect we don't use all our brain... and if we WERE perfect, then we would use more of it.
Perfection is subjective. What does a subjective state have to do with the factual functionings of a human organ?
no, that's a totally different part of the body, it's not even part of the brain... it's connected it, but it controls unconscious things, like breathing, heartbeat, and even digesting. it's like at the back of your neck, a little up... that's why a strike in the right place stops your heart and breathing.
The medula, or brain stem, coordinates most autonomic process, delegating tasking through the spinal cord and various centralised ganglia. Considering this "seperate" from the brain is specious. It is, in fact, fair to consider the spinal cord itself (and as a result the major ganglia) as extensions of the brain stem, and thus, the brain. Biology and anatomy are, as they say, A1-SUPAR.
Razor, I voted for donuts, since you didn't have any sensible options.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
A I'm using a PC as an analogy, NOT as a direct comparison. When one considers the massively parallel nature and network-of-localised networks structure, NO you cannot compare them. Lets not confuse analogy for correlation.
B Perfection is subjective. What does a subjective state have to do with the factual functionings of a human organ?
C The medula, or brain stem, coordinates most autonomic process, delegating tasking through the spinal cord and various centralised ganglia. Considering this "seperate" from the brain is specious. It is, in fact, fair to consider the spinal cord itself (and as a result the major ganglia) as extensions of the brain stem, and thus, the brain. Biology and anatomy are, as they say, A1-SUPAR.
A. just checking ;)
B. By "perfect" i mean we have a perfect immune system, etc... that we can't get sick, when we cut ourselves open we don't die of infections, etc.
C. So you think that a small part of the brain (because the area of the brain that controls breathing, etc. is VERY small in comparison to the rest of the brain... probably about 10% of it, if that) is 90% of our brain, and the other parts of the brain (which is by far the majority) is using its full capacity (100%)? it doesn't make sense... if a little part of the brain is using 90% of the brain, then whats the brain itself doing?
also... i'd disagree that the spinal chord is an extension, or part of the brain... sure it carries nerves and stuff, but it can't process any information, so therefore it's not part of the brain... the nerves to TO the brain the processes the information
-
Originally Slurred by Stealth
-now my friend Knight_Templar, what are you on?
-i don't know about you, but as for me: your mom!
-see this isn't my first, and it won't be my last
-i've got a mission to accomplish, so chill out, enjoy, laugh!
-i'm here to be helpful, work, and have fun
-if you got a bad attitude, you'll see the barrel of gun
-so stop the words coming out of your mouth
-in fact, i'm still waiting on one from the GTD Wolf.
- Wow Mr. Stealth man, that was really Gay.
- You see I'm waiting for a few of mine any day.
- So while you sit here and play with your dick,
- I'll be in your moms bed havin' a good lick.
- Don't **** with me man,
- You'll begin to see what you have been avoiding so long
- The one you evade, it's called Harsh reality.
- You be sittin' posin' and rapp'n like you NaS or Jay-Z
- But in fact you're as old as Vannila ice, you're over, don't you see?
don't h8, I sk8. :wink: :p
-
I think Stealth has way too many avatars. He should be adminized me thinks before GameSpy chargs him for using too much status space.
*Runs not* :p
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
mmmmm doughnuts... ;7
Bah that choice is for people who don't have a clue what I am talking about. First I started with peanuts, then Thunder used bacon now doughnuts. Whee!! Admit it, I am the poll master! Admit it! Admit it! :drevil:
-
only read 1st post...
well my theroy on the empty 90% is used for memory related things, like they say if someone could rember EVERYTHING he would be VERY confused and would never make ture scence, so in that case wouldent the brain be using its unused 90%? quite so imo, btw the reason why I think this as well is that biologists could never find truely find the memory storage part of the brain so maybe thats what the 90% is
-
Well, looks like doughnuts win. :sigh:
-
Can't we get this back on topic slightly? It's got the potential of a good topic...
-
Yes ma'm. :nod:
-
:devil:
-
Originally posted by Stealth
C. So you think that a small part of the brain (because the area of the brain that controls breathing, etc. is VERY small in comparison to the rest of the brain... probably about 10% of it, if that) is 90% of our brain, and the other parts of the brain (which is by far the majority) is using its full capacity (100%)? it doesn't make sense... if a little part of the brain is using 90% of the brain, then whats the brain itself doing?
also... i'd disagree that the spinal chord is an extension, or part of the brain... sure it carries nerves and stuff, but it can't process any information, so therefore it's not part of the brain... the nerves to TO the brain the processes the information
The medulla, spinal cord and basal ganglia DO process information. jerk-motion reactions, such as the classic knee reflex, or pulling your hand away from an intense heat source, are processed and handled by the local ganglia. There's an observable processing delay caused by this: your body will often react to pain stimulus (reaction from ganglia) before you become concious of the pain (reaction from cerebrum).
At no point, however, did I state or imply that the medulla, spinal cord or ganglia were responsible for 90% of brain activity. not also that the spinal cord and ganglia total up to approximately 1/2 of the mass of the rest of the brain. Your 10% guess is WAY off.
-
How exactly do you define "potential" brain power as opposed to exercised brain power?
-
Originally posted by Thunder
:devil:
Oh I am so afraid.
-
"Humans are stupid" is the right answer.
just look at yourself and you'll know what I mean...
-
You talking to me? :drevil:
-
I think that goes without saying.
Originally posted by YodaSean
I'm pretty sure its all penguins :)
Long Dark Tea-Time Of The Soul?
-
Originally posted by Thunder
Can't we get this back on topic slightly? It's got the potential of a good topic...
read my poist ;)
-
If people really are using the full 100% of their brainpower, than a lot of people don't have much of intelligence at all. :sigh: sadness......
I do believe in a sort of precognition, intuition, as a subconscious ability.
Quote time!:
"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift." -Albert Einstiein
-
:sigh: sadness......
BTW, could you change that in your sig.. its been misspelled for so long.
:)
For the record , i agreee. Besides, its a dull thought to think that there isn't room for improvement, kinda like an afterlife or aliens.
but lets not get into that.
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
- Wow Mr. Stealth man, that was really Gay.
- You see I'm waiting for a few of mine any day.
- So while you sit here and play with your dick,
- I'll be in your moms bed havin' a good lick.
- Don't **** with me man,
- You'll begin to see what you have been avoiding so long
- The one you evade, it's called Harsh reality.
- You be sittin' posin' and rapp'n like you NaS or Jay-Z
- But in fact you're as old as Vannila ice, you're over, don't you see?
[/size]
alright b1tch... but i wasn't even trying,
cause if i did you'd be on the floor screaming... dying
enough of that... if you want to battle me do it in the battle thread :D i don't want to 0wn you in front of everyone here. also Thunder said to get back on-topic, and i'll honor his words, and keep it On topic
-
Oh stop your *****in you lil pussy
I'm sure if its too off topic, you'll cover it with a preemptive "woopsie"
And hey man, what are you trying to pull over my eyes.
You wanted to try to make me look small, but you forgot the first tag to size.
this could get gayer fast.. lemme know when you want to start something in the battles thing.
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
For the record , i agreee. Besides, its a dull thought to think that there isn't room for improvement, kinda like an afterlife or aliens.
"Dull"?
We're the species that built the Pyramids, the Great Wall of China and PUT PEOPLE ON THE MOON.
What the hell is "dull" about the human mind, its abilities, its potential or its ability to expand and encompass the wider universe?
Its like, if we don't have as yet unreached abilities, we're on the same level as rhesus monkeys to here you put it, KT.
-
no no no.. monkeys are amusing to watch.. but you don't even speak of them on an intelectual level unless you are a naturalist or comparing them.
Perhaps dull was the wrong word, but I likle to think of "the bigger picture" . It's slightly both "optimist and pisimist" as I want to see us become bigger and better, yet I also don't see us as good as we can be. What i mean by dull is we still don't have FTL travel or true premontional (sp) skills. Yes these are very sci-fi based, but that is were I am getting it.
Your point is not without merit though, I just chose the wrong words.
-
Well, like I said, this whole discussion is somewhat meaningless until we define what exactly "potential brain power" is. In one sense, the brain "can" only do what it is doing (if we knew all the natural laws, this would be the only way to measure it), and on the other hand, in theory the brain can certainly understand its own workings and "artificially" augment itself to do just about anything (e.g. computers are indirectly a product of the brain).
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
no no no.. monkeys are amusing to watch.. but you don't even speak of them on an intelectual level unless you are a naturalist or comparing them.
Perhaps dull was the wrong word, but I likle to think of "the bigger picture" . It's slightly both "optimist and pisimist" as I want to see us become bigger and better, yet I also don't see us as good as we can be. What i mean by dull is we still don't have FTL travel or true premontional (sp) skills. Yes these are very sci-fi based, but that is were I am getting it.
Your point is not without merit though, I just chose the wrong words.
Well you know assuming there isn't some kind of pre-fabricating uber-deity managing the world (and creating some kind of ultimate goal to life, or 'the big picture') and its wonders it's quite amazing for some little chimp to eventually make a microwave.
You're view is quite human, so to speak, in which you always are incontent with the amazing things that you are quite used to and have to reach toward higher things.
FTL/Premonition may seem to be an acme of human development but when I will foretell that people in the year 5000 will be saying: "it's a pity we're so dumb we don't have omnipotency yet"
Conclusion: look around you and appreciate humanity (the brain power, not the humans themselves :p)
-
it's a pity we're so dumb we don't have omnipotency yet
hear hear!
-
1. That'd be the 10% devoted to remembering TV programming and microwave burrito heating instructions, no doubt.
2. If we really had a useless 90% in the most significant, complex, and difficult to develop and maintain organ in our bodies, we'd have been extinct long ago. You don't see wolves running around with giant malfunctioning biological air conditioners on their backs for precisely this reason.
3. Since the vast majority of your brain is simply there to connect one neuron to another, and in the form of myelin sheathing (read: fat), and only the very surface is functional brain at all really, there's really nothing else there to use.
4. If you've ever seen an MRI scan or one of those other neural-activity scans, nearly all of that surface gets used at some point. Some of it looks like all the time.
6. Certain pop "scientists" could do with using 10% of their brains, rather than .1%.
-
the 10% comes from at one time we use 10% brainpower but we use all of our brain not at same time dough and if IF we used 90% of brainpower at 1 time we could process information 80% faster we could calculate warp field amplitudes in seconds and the encryption code mentioned in another thread would be a matter of seconds to crack.....
-
Originally posted by Ashrak
IF we used 90% of brainpower at 1 time we could process information 80% faster we could calculate warp field amplitudes in seconds and the encryption code mentioned in another thread would be a matter of seconds to crack.....
And your basis for this spurious outburst of speculation is... ?
What the hell is a Warp Field Amplitude?
And do you have any idea how encryption works?
-
See, with a 1000% brainpower increase, we'd be able to answer these sorts of questions!:D
Though I gotta say, if humans were that much smarter, I at least would get bored fast. I mean, really- if you can solve nearly any problem you can think of fairly quickly and easily, what's to live for? Playing Tetris in your mind? Lifting matches through telekinesis? Shooting bad heroin? I dunno, but it would suck no matter what.
-
Actually I might enjoy being able to read books I like in a matter of minutes...... :p (there are people who can read books a page a second, what'll happen with a 1000% increase?)
-
Personally, I think there is more to the brain than just processing and storage. The brain is such a complex organ that we have only BEGUN to discover its potential.
Hell, there are things that I can do that I'm sure some of you can't. For one thing, I can usually tell you what a dog is thinking before they do anything. (no BS!) Furthermore, I have the odd habit of knowing when severe weather hits nearby.
About four years ago, I woke up at 3am. It wasn't really storming outside (wasn't even raining!). Just a little lightshow that nature was puting on. SOMETHING told me to turn the television on, so I went into the living room and turned it on. Sure enough, we were in a tornado warning. Damn thing touched down only a couple of miles away! I thought it was a coincidence till it happened again last Saturday. Freaky, eh?
-
Sorry to break it to ya, but those people don't read for comprehension. They can reel off good chunks of the book afterward sometimes, but they won't get what it's talking about (if it's got more depth than, say, a checkout-line bestseller) unelss they go reread it more carefully or sit down for a few hours and try to think over what they've memorized. It also doesn't have a high intelligence requirement to do, it's just a memnonic/rapid acquisition thing...
-
Exactly. I could read a chapter in a history book in mere minutes, but if you were to ask me questions about it, I'll be like "HUH?!"
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Sorry to break it to ya, but those people don't read for comprehension. They can reel off good chunks of the book afterward sometimes, but they won't get what it's talking about (if it's got more depth than, say, a checkout-line bestseller) unelss they go reread it more carefully or sit down for a few hours and try to think over what they've memorized. It also doesn't have a high intelligence requirement to do, it's just a memnonic/rapid acquisition thing...
Well if we thought at a higher pace (i.e. we can compress those hours of thought to a minute) then it'd solve it, but I doubt humans have that much natural potential. (especially as people are continuing to think less and less, and become more of potatoes than people)
-
Now here's a scary thought-
If we were all smart, what would be on TV?
-
Ok, to bring this back on a serious note here is my theory.
We humans have a body, Scientists proved, that is meant to live forever. The degredation of our body over the years cannot be accounted for even in the best earth and life conditions. It is true certain unnatural things made by us humans have proven to degrade our body over long periods of time. Anyways, our bodies were designed to live forever, dont beleive me do some research.
This theory being proven by many in the scientific community, brings us to the 10% theory on the use of our brain. What i think scientists mean when saying that is most likely contributed to motor skills. I beleive they think we only use 10% of our brain for motor functions, some go over that with great abilities such as fastest sprinter, genius minds and more.
Another thought of mine is tied to the fact we are meant to live much longer then we currently are. It is proven the farther you go back in history, the lifespan (under normal and natural surroundings) increased greatly. Living over 100yrs was not something special 100 yrs ago or 200 yrs ago in some places, it was a normal occurrence. Only recently in the past 20 or 30 yrs has lifespan greatly decreased. Since our knowledge has increased so has our life expactancy decreased.
So living longer, our bodies not meant to die, brings around the reason why we only use 10% of our brain. We simply cannot live long enough to reach the 100% potential. All we can do is hope we can multiply our 10% through books and passing along teachings to future generations in hopes we can achieve greatness through intelligence.
Basically we use 10% of our brain only because we dont have enough lifetime to actually fill it any further. Imagine if Einstein lived 50 more years? He might of maxed out his brain already, if he lived 20 more years or 50 more years he might have been considered even more genius and our world today would be drastically different.
If you tie religion into this, you can have a great many debates on a variety of possiblities. Fact is no one really knows how much brain we actually use apart from brain functions related to motor skills. We can only assume 5% is motor and another 5% must be thought and perception and other mind boggling things. We can never truely know.
I for one beleive we as humans should be able to live longer and if we did the knowledge and experience achieved would be so great it cld only be compared to Godly. Which brings us to another subject. you know how "the man" keeps you down so to speak. Well maybe this is God's way of keeping "man down" by lowering our life expactancy or knowing we cld do that on our on, in hopes we never achieve his greatness in knowledge. He may be just some alien who scientifically made us then got scared of us and made us suffer with life expectancy in hopes our knwledge can never reach his. Who knows.
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Now here's a scary thought-
If we were all smart, what would be on TV?
Only National Geographic 24 hours a day? :shaking:
-
:wtf: @ most posts in this thread.
1) All areas of the human brain are used.
2) "Brainpower" is not a matter of how much bulk is used or available for use, it is a matter of how dense the synapses are between membranes. Every one of us therefore uses 100% (or close to it) of our "brainpower." Moreover, the phrase "exercise your brain" is not at all meaningless: that reading and thinking more will increase your "brainpower" is biologically true, in that more synaptic contacts are formed by repeated use.
3) "Potential" brainpower is therefore a meaningless concept, in the same way that the "potential number of bits that will ever traverse the internet" is a meaningless concept. All that can be said is that both will remain a finite quantity, but how much either could be is undefined.
All this blither about using only 10% of our "brainpower" is fundamentally nonsensical. Therefore, all your doughnuts are belong to us.
-
That's exactly what I have been saying! This "potential brain power" is not well-defined.
-
Originally posted by CP5670
That's exactly what I have been saying! This "potential brain power" is not well-defined.
In fact, it is undefinable. There may be certain biological upper limits, just as there are on muscle mass, but like any biological upper limit, they are "stretchy." It just gets harder to continue as one progresses.
You were one of the few at whom I wasn't :wtf:ing. :D
-
Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
:wtf: @ most posts in this thread.
1) All areas of the human brain are used.
2) "Brainpower" is not a matter of how much bulk is used or available for use, it is a matter of how dense the synapses are between membranes. Every one of us therefore uses 100% (or close to it) of our "brainpower." Moreover, the phrase "exercise your brain" is not at all meaningless: that reading and thinking more will increase your "brainpower" is biologically true, in that more synaptic contacts are formed by repeated use.
3) "Potential" brainpower is therefore a meaningless concept, in the same way that the "potential number of bits that will ever traverse the internet" is a meaningless concept. All that can be said is that both will remain a finite quantity, but how much either could be is undefined.
All this blither about using only 10% of our "brainpower" is fundamentally nonsensical. Therefore, all your doughnuts are belong to us.
It sounds logical what you are saying here, but how does one prove this theory? Or has it already been proven? I dont doubt its plausibility, however facts would be nice to follow up on. Im sure we arent using our brains full potential and im sure if we are using 100% (if we can actually calculate it in numbers) at any one time do we go up to 110% when we learn more or were we not at 100% at the time? I mean memory is part of the brain, therefore 100% use of the brain includes memory. So u can see my dilemma, when learning more in life in experience and teachings yet we are already using 100%, maybe we go to 110% cause we used more? Does our brain grow or something? heads get bigger as u learn and experience more? Man this is a brain teaser, its the thought that never ends..........it goes on and on my friends...........:shaking:
-
I guess it would be possible to find some point at which the brain has reached an absolute maximum "capacity" (although that may be nearly impossible to reach), but the thing is, suppose we directly modify a brain and add a computer onto it, that would make the brain more powerful, increasing the "potential" brain power. But whatever was done to the brain was an idea and product of the old brain, so the old brain also had the "potential." :D And if the brain "can" use this extra 90%, why is it not doing so? (that would mean that it "cannot" :D)
Therefore, the doughnut option in the poll is the best one. :nod:
-
/me hides in a corner shaking
All this talk of brains, and doughnuts strangely enough are making me hungry.
-
Originally posted by Lonestar
It sounds logical what you are saying here, but how does one prove this theory? Or has it already been proven? I dont doubt its plausibility, however facts would be nice to follow up on. Im sure we arent using our brains full potential and im sure if we are using 100% (if we can actually calculate it in numbers) at any one time do we go up to 110% when we learn more or were we not at 100% at the time? I mean memory is part of the brain, therefore 100% use of the brain includes memory. So u can see my dilemma, when learning more in life in experience and teachings yet we are already using 100%, maybe we go to 110% cause we used more? Does our brain grow or something? heads get bigger as u learn and experience more? Man this is a brain teaser, its the thought that never ends..........it goes on and on my friends...........:shaking:
See a certain recent issue of Scientific American for proof. Last month? Two months ago? Something like that, anyway. It was kicking around in our dorm's bathroom for a while, but disappeared eventually. But since I'd already read it cover to cover twice, I didn't bother looking into its fate.
And the way it works re: learning is very similar to building muscles through exercise. In states of relative mental rest, the rate of synapse firing is low, but when busily thinking about something, synapses fire quickly. Steady use will cause more synaptic pathways to be forged between brain cells, much like steady use will cause an increase in numbers and in strength of muscles cells.
I should add that different areas are used for different things, and heavy, sustained mental activity in one area will cause the forging of more synaptic pathways in that area, and not in others. So when CP5670 spends large amounts of time working on mathematical problems, the areas of his brain involved in mathematical reasoning are strengthened, whereas those involved in, say, literary creativity are not. Thus the idea of an overall IQ is misleading. One would do better to speak of IQs.
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Now here's a scary thought-
If we were all smart, what would be on TV?
Even scarier...what would games be like?
-
Simple. There wouldn't be any. We wouldn't want to lower ourselves to the level of primitive games. But since we aren't that "inteligent" we play games anyway. :p
-
What the...? The doughnuts are still in the lead. I knew I shouldn't have added those. ;7
-
Originally posted by Lonestar
We humans have a body, Scientists proved, that is meant to live forever. The degredation of our body over the years cannot be accounted for even in the best earth and life conditions. It is true certain unnatural things made by us humans have proven to degrade our body over long periods of time. Anyways, our bodies were designed to live forever, dont beleive me do some research.
Whaaaaat??? Excuse me, but pandering-to-senior-citizens notwithstanding, damn few biologists would say anything but quite the reverse. Even under ideal conditions, the body decays. Hell, that's what cancer's all about- if you live long enough (like in modern times) that something else doesn't kill you by age 60, your chromosomes themselves start decaying! Is THAT your idea of "built to last forever"? Go look at somebody at age 80, anybody at age 80, and tell me that they could, should, or would be living for any great period of time longer.
I don't believe you. I've done some research well before now, and some quite thorough research, too. I still don't believe you, and in fact don't believe you've done the research.:doubt:
-
Originally posted by Lonestar
We humans have a body, Scientists proved, that is meant to live forever. The degredation of our body over the years cannot be accounted for even in the best earth and life conditions. It is true certain unnatural things made by us humans have proven to degrade our body over long periods of time. Anyways, our bodies were designed to live forever, dont beleive me do some research.
Um.. I have two words for you. "Prionids" and "telomeres".
Next time you do "research", include some basic human cellular biology and biochemistry to the list of subjects.
-
I have heard about equal support for both sides, and there does not seem to be a clear agreement in the medical community on that point. It is possible that people only die because of loss of immunity to diseases (so if the diseases are not there they would live indefinitely), or it may be that the bodies themselves automatically decay after some time (although we have not reached the limit yet, since the average lifespan is growing higher and higher over time with advances in medicine).
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Um.. I have two words for you. "Prionids" and "telomeres".
Next time you do "research", include some basic human cellular biology and biochemistry to the list of subjects.
Dont knock it until you FULLY research it. I have added those, and it took years for me to draw this conclusion. Bodies are designed to live forever, but what happens outside the body is not accounted for. As CP said, arguments can be made for both sides of this although if you think about it, how our bodies fight diseases and repairs broken bones etc... it maes alot of sense that our bodies are a self maintaining machine striving for longevity. Unfortunately what you eat, breath, drink and the way you act changes what your body is designed for.
Styke 9, i assure you I have but all i have is my word here. Im not debating whther you or I or anyone here has actually done the research, nor am i trying to push my beleif onto anyone. Im merely stating my beleif.
Dont beleive it, thats fine by me ill still live for atleast another 30 or so yrs. I just find it hard to beleive you have done as much research as you say you have and have missed that part about how the body is designed and what it looks like it is or was capable of. I find that strange indeed. My own biology teacher argued in high school the fact the body is designed to live forever, yet it is unexplained why it begins to degrade after so many years. He said it makes no sense, although the facts show otherwise, the design of the body would lead you to beleive it cld last forever. Of course i didnt beleive him because he was a teacher in high school, but over the years many facts i have read and heard had me beleiving the same thing he did.
-
We're idiots. We've got all this great technology and we're destroying the world? Forgetaboutit.
-
Originally posted by Razor
Simple. There wouldn't be any. We wouldn't want to lower ourselves to the level of primitive games. But since we aren't that "inteligent" we play games anyway. :p
Or look at it another way....how hard would they be? Can you just imagine such missions in FS2? Alpha1 would have one hell of a day. :D
-
Originally posted by Lonestar
it is unexplained why it begins to degrade after so many years. He said it makes no sense, although the facts show otherwise, the design of the body would lead you to beleive it cld last forever. Of course i didnt beleive him because he was a teacher in high school, but over the years many facts i have read and heard had me beleiving the same thing he did.
You haven't answered the responses at all. After a certain period of time (at about the 40-year mark), your body's internal repair systems start to wear down, and you start to fall apart slowly, because, outside influences or no, your body still is constantly taking itself apart a bit at a time and putting itself back together- it's a bit important that that second bit is done. It's purely internal, it's completely natural, it's next to impossible to reverse to even the slightest degree. It's what the body's built to do. Never mind that, a little bit after that age, our chromosomal pattern begins to degrade irretrievably from sheer age, which would most certainly not be conducive to living forever- go ahead, just TRY and survive without functional DNA strands.
You can say you've researched it all you like; unless you know something nobody else does and thus can account for the fact that, according to all of modern science, you're completely wrong, you're still just as wrong.