|
oh my god (pg. 14)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Orbax |
| either that we are all stuck in a marble that aliens are playing with. |
|
|
| Floorfiller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
basically in the words of my professor "We actually have no idea and people in a few hundred years will most likely make fun of us" |
ok i just had a crazy thought...
is it possible to have a finite level of knowledge? for example, it takes time to learn information and levels of thinking and learning depend to a great extent on previous information especially when it comes to things like new discovery and new knowledge. so then my question is, given that people have a finite lifespan...could we ever reach a level on understanding to which you simply would not be able to gain more information because it would take an entire life time to learn everything up to the point where one could start to make new discoveries?...if that made sense at all :conf: |
|
|
| M@t |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorfiller
ok i just had a crazy thought...
is it possible to have a finite level of knowledge? for example, it takes time to learn information and levels of thinking and learning depend to a great extent on previous information especially when it comes to things like new discovery and new knowledge. so then my question is, given that people have a finite lifespan...could we ever reach a level on understanding to which you simply would not be able to gain more information because it would take an entire life time to learn everything up to the point where one could start to make new discoveries?...if that made sense at all :conf: |
I expect memory would be a limiting factor
You could gain a huge wealth of knowledge but unless you keep this knowledge at the forefront of your memory by perhaps imparting it, then its just gonna sink down and get lost, then be replaced by new knowledge. Until you reach a steady state of knowledge balanced by gaining new and forgetting that which is not accessed regularly.
Hehe, some like that anyway |
|
|
| Floorfiller |
| quote: | Originally posted by M@t
I expect memory would be a limiting factor
You could gain a huge wealth of knowledge but unless you keep this knowledge at the forefront of your memory by perhaps imparting it, then its just gonna sink down and get lost, then be replaced by new knowledge. Until you reach a steady state of knowledge balanced by gaining new and forgetting that which is not accessed regularly.
Hehe some like that anyway |
well i don't mean as an individual...i mean as a civilization. lemme try to explain a little better.
ok so if you're learning math...you start out basic and move up to more advanced understandings of it. your ability to comprehend more difficult problems is routed in your understanding of earlier phases of math. so if it took you your whole life to learn math up to a certain level of difficulty, say you're working at a maximum capacity and under perfect circumstances, there could be levels of math beyond your understanding, but you would never be able to learn them.
so if we ever got to a similar point as a civilization, meaning that anyone born would need to learn so much before they could begin to move forward into those more difficult levels, then we as a civilization would never learn them....
i dunno, i'm just rambling most likely... |
|
|
| Jocker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorfiller
ok i just had a crazy thought...
is it possible to have a finite level of knowledge? for example, it takes time to learn information and levels of thinking and learning depend to a great extent on previous information especially when it comes to things like new discovery and new knowledge. so then my question is, given that people have a finite lifespan...could we ever reach a level on understanding to which you simply would not be able to gain more information because it would take an entire life time to learn everything up to the point where one could start to make new discoveries?...if that made sense at all :conf: |
i would think, theoretically, yes, since the memory capacity is not indefinite... but, as with all the knowledge, people tend to summarize/aggregate general ideas, and then divide them into more specific stuff for professions. you would not be able to learn all the info today as it is - to know all the literature heroes, everything about astronomy, everything about philosophy. but you don't need to. you get the general body of knowledge, and then you learn the specific stuff related to the profession you choose. as more discoveries are made and more knowledge is available, you will have more and more branched-out professions. this process of "divide and rule" could go on indefinitely to accomodate the growing body of knowledge.
like, 40 years ago there were just computer programmers, 20 years ago there were C programmers, 10 years ago there were web-porgrammers, 5 years ago - web programmers dealing with databases, 3 years ago - web programmers dealing with databases in multi-tiered environment, now - web programmers dealing with grid computations in databases in multi-tiered environment, and so on... subjects, that were once thought of as general and 1 topic, constantly branch out into more specific subdivisions. |
|
|
| Xenocreator_PG_ |
| when I die Im hoping maggots & worms will eat my corpse. Im looking forward to that episode of my existance, though Im also looking forward to doing my morning poop (ive packed a big one today!!) ;) |
|
|
| Jocker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorfiller
so if we ever got to a similar point as a civilization, meaning that anyone born would need to learn so much before they could begin to move forward into those more difficult levels, then we as a civilization would never learn them....
|
but we wouldn't need to. nowadays, the situation is the same: there are such great advances in mathematics, but in real life hardly anyone not in the math field knows anything beyond solving integrals - if that at all - while that part was started to be researched as long as 350 years ago. you get a basic general knowledge, and then you branch out as fast as you can to pursue the research in the field that interests you. |
|
|
| Orbax |
as far as the "group mind" theory goes...to an extent. Its a middle ground of explosive innovation every few hundred years or one brilliant man changing the world and everyone working on that for a while. We tend to get stuck on ideas and try to make them work until someone blows it out of the water then we work on that.
if you go to ibm.com/research youll find them working on a new gel/liquid memory idea modeled after the human brain. It technically has infinite capacity, like memory. Only problem are routines and routes to establish the links. Its why you randomly remember stuff sometimes. Its still there, the path is just over grown and weed choked :D Or beer beer choked.
Im not sure I believe in a social consciousness though, because well...lots of ig'nant folks out there hehe.
we tend to just agree to agree on somethings and agree to disagree on others, and, like I said before, there are usually people that come along and attach an indexical meaning to our knowledge showing us what to work for or what to dismiss. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| So who here likes peanut butter. I prefer smooth but once in awhile crunchy peanut butter is what the doctor orders. |
|
|
| JinX_33 |
| LOLOL, i was totally into everything, but i lost it when i read that |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
great, this is going to be a fun weekend! (i'm driving up to tampa with her to visit this uncle and his family). |
Well gee, I could have a talk with her if you want... :stongue: |
|
|
| D-res |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis86
that...all I believe in is drugs, music and sex. |
omg.... clovis... you are my hero
plus ing one
hahaha :wtf: |
|
|
|
|
