Ian and I had this conversation a few days ago. It was quite interesting =)

====================================>>>

Kay: y'know what I wanna take in university? physics theory

Fire: physics theory =

Kay: yea, just pure THEORY. cuz ya know, einstein came up with pretty mind-boggling stuff about the physical world. there's supposedly 5 dimensions, he says.

Fire: yeah. time is one of them… and I forget others

Kay: the first dimension is just a dot. the second is the flatness of squares, circles, blah blah blah.. we live in the third dimension, and the fourth is time, the fifth is space. Or something

Fire: he also theorized that the speed of light is the maximum speed that can be attained… btw quantum physics = o_O* oh gosh heh

Kay: i know hahah… but there's a course offered that requires no math. NO MATH!!!! now that's fascinating

skip some miscellaneous conversation

Kay: did you read my post about seeing a red flyer on a light post?

Fire: yeah heh.. gotta be careful of that stuff, those preachers are pretty, convincing

Kay: they can be, for the moment, yes… but he can't convert me. whoever it is. whatever proof he had, I was gonna look it up and try to think as critically as I can. I need answers, dammit

Fire: religion, our assistance in search for meaning but what is our assistance in searching for the meaning of religion?

Kay: Ha, I say screw religion, so I'm passed that already my friend

Fire: given up on it?

Kay: yes. I honestly don't think God will be so full of pride as to ask us to perform rituals for Him. it's so humane to expect such a thing

Fire: but you still believ in a higher being, and not the structures of the church

Kay: yes. there is definitely a higher being living within us, and that higher being is God Himself. I still believe in His saving Grace, whatever and however it helps us in our daily lives. I just can't stand how the church is structured. it's so hypocritical

Fire: I dont necessarily agree with everything the church feels is RIGHT either. I believe people can celebrate the Sabbath in whatever way they can whether it be through personal prayer, or something else not going to church isnt a bad thing

Kay: yea, I mean which is better -- someone who goes to church, performs all the rituals, but is a jackass or someone who doesn't do shit, but is the kindest and most selfless person you know

Fire: yeah heh myself, I try to be a good Christian, but I dont go to church weekly, but I try to be good, I pray nightly

Kay: I stopped doing the sign of the cross. as of now, I don't know if Jesus was the Christ. I'll probably never know, but it's a lot more complicated than that. I mean, I still pray. but I don't pray to anyone or any being other than God Himself

Fire: I believe, Jesus was a true figure in history and all this written of him, it must have been for a reason, "where theres smoke theres a fire"

Kay: yea the probability of His existence is high. what of his purpose tho? were his stories ferreal? and what about mohammad? and the buddha? I mean, they were created for a reason too

Fire: another one of my beliefs is that God has many forms, and we are all worshipping the same being in our own ways

Kay: yea, which is like my theory. there is one universal truth. everyone on earth can only understand and experience one perception of that truth, so all these debates about reality are purely silly and arrogent. we dont know. we'll never know. the same applies to God

Fire: cant say we'll never know… heh

Kay: I'll say we'll never know. I mean, humans only have 5 senses. we can only know so much thru these 5. just think, how miniscule are we in this ENTIRE universe? I honestly think we'll kill ourselves before we ever discover what's tru. and then when we're in another realm, we'll finally discover what's tru and what's not (and then I made some degrading comment about athiests lol. I love you all.)

Fire: have you give some thought to there being more than a finite number of senses?

Kay: I think people can have more than five senses. unfortunately, science snubs those people to be frauds

Fire: what about the sense of knowing someone who cares? which would that go under? or that feeling of fear

Kay: even psychiatry believes that some people can perceive things out of the ordinary. we just can't tell whether those people are real or not. Now with emotions.. that's a different kind of sense. those are all biologically explained by hormones and chemicals cursing thru your body

this gets a little confusing.. we messaged each other about a bunch of things while the other messaged about another thing.

Fire: explain to me the process of the brain. you cant. this blob of flesh in my skull cavity is talking to you. scienficically explain that.

Fire: I cant explain the brain. its too complex. if you think of the brain in a physical sense, it is finite. finite dimensions, etc etc..

Kay: the process of the brain? there's billions lol…the brain is a mass of electric pulses. that's what our bodily functions transforms all our senses into. so some people would say that reality is what we can sense thru our senses, but I don't think that's tru at all. that's just what our bodies perceive to be there

Fire: but in a non-physical sense, [the brain] is infinite. you can think of anything, at any time -- otherwise the thing we call imagination. how can something finite generate the infinite?

Kay: well, even scientists haven't fully understood our brain. it's very very complex but what I know is that it's a mass of electrical charges. anything we think, feel, sense, becomes a charge of some sort. I don't know how it works, but of course, physically, our brain can only hold so much, but it doesn't make our thoughts finite

Fire: you can explain the brain maybe but you cant explain the mind

Kay: aah.. so there's the differentiating line between the brain and the mind. philosophers say that the mind is a part of our souls. it's not tangible, which is why we can't explain it. this I agree. for every physical occurrance, I believe that there is a parallel in a completely different realm, be it a spiritual occurrance or what have you

Fire: "for every physical occurrance, I believe that there is a parallel in a completely different realm, be it a spiritual occurrance or what have you". So can a spiritual occurrance trigger a physical occurrence?

Kay: yes. this is where God's grace comes in. when a miracle occurs, it's spiritual, but of course in our physical world, something physical has to happen for the miracle to be possible, hence why science doesn't explain everything

Fire: hehe science doesnt record everything

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 12:48 AM

 
True say, true say.

Anyone else have anything to add?

I myself would discuss this further, but I have said all I can about reality and dimensions and physics.

About LP, I've defended my side, and all I have left are what pisses me off about them. I don't want to complain, so let's start a new debate/commentary/topic/thingie.

Suggestions, anyone?

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 12:01 AM

 
Physics are abstract concepts. I have issues with abstract concepts.
Those of such a background/interests come up with some pretty whack ideas. These are hypotheses to attempt to explain how this world works. One theory supports another otherwise "proves it" and things bubble up from there. The whole thing sounds like a sci-fi novel and could very well be one.
In textbooks there are formulas. Formulas that calulate the # of vertices given sides, formulas that calculate time given speed and distance, formulas that calculate the # of rotations given radius, time, and speed. However, they are all supported by the basic theories. What happens when those theories don't work?
I did some research on some dude back in Grade 9 or 10 where he had this theory that what we see are only illusions. For example, if you turn 3D shapes so that it's sides and vertices are in certain positions relative to the viewer is so happens that the viewer sees it as a 2D image rather than object. This happens because of human optics. This makes everything we've ever learned in school (math, science) invalid. The only reason why humanities aren't smashed in this is because they are comparatively more flexible than our "physical" otherwise "right or wrong" "subjects". Still, they are affected. Philosophy for example, takes on a huge and different perspective. There are others such as Phys. Ed, Technology, Economics and so on that also get slammed. Kinda freaky eh?
To me, dimensions are just another perspective of this thing we call world. It is a interesting theory with lots of comprehensible gears to back it up. And yah, as the dimensions progress they do incorporate each other got the sake of function. It's like distance equals time multiplied by speed. You got to have time and speed-- just like how in order to have the third dimension you must have both first and third. Absence of one or the other falsifies the formula.
Touching on concepts of God *sigh*, some argue it is a human scapegoat, others the aliens, even more the apolocalpse. I used to say that the only reason why people believe in the dude is because people can't deal with/explain the unknown. I mean, we're scared of the dark because we can't see in it and therefore are unaccustomed to it. We think the supernatural because we really can't explain life after death becasue we really have not been there and back. These dead cut-offs get us fucking pissed because we hate not knowing. As we can explain more with science however, some cease to turn to a "greater power". I USED to say this.
Now i say God CAN exist. It depends on what the indiviual believes. Each theory is explained by a complex supporting circle of thoroughly-thought-out proofs according to the individual. They will clash with the ideas of other individuals because not all beliefs are uniform. I think this is why shit like war happens. It's because we are not uniform and people have this urge to be uniform because they think it's right. I mean if what you do agrees with something that someone else does, it makes both of you "right" so, you band together. When you meet other that are not so, you quarrel. *"Right" and "wrong" does not exist. Only what "works" and what "does not work" exist.*

PS Why LP= Boyband
Boybands by simple definition are bands that are strictly composed of young males.
Boybands by further defintion are a musical group of young males that have immerged into pop culture with screaming fans (usually of obsessive teenage girls).
LP is composed of young males (no explanation needed)
LP is pop. Some may even go to say they are pop music since it is "popular music". Recently, one of their songs was the official presentation song of the 2003 MTV awards, an astounding influence of today's pop culture--if not a dictator of its development. LP is a "hybridized" version of what N*sync and Backstreet Boys were a couple of years back and what Babyface, Boyz 2 Men, and New Kids on the Block were during their time. Today, teens are into rock (look at the target market of newly introduced shops such as West 49, Spencers, and Boathouse. The stores claim their apparrel is for skaters, boarders, and surfers. There are 2 fairly small skateparks in the surrounding areas within a 1 hour drive. Southern Ontario snow sport facilities suck. And surfing, lmfao, doesn't exist in Canada unless you call the the most Eastern and Western points valid. Then again, Southern Ontario is located a considerable distance from both locations. Poseurs.) So we are now into rock rather than r+b. It is pop culture.
Perhaps LP wouldn't be critisized by so many to such an extent if it didn't try so hard to stay in popular culture.
"True" rock music enthusiasts claim that the best stuff is underground. LP's recently released album sold 10 million internationally in the first week.
Perhaps this success is due to their photoshoots and appearances in teen magazines, televisions, and huge world tour concerts. According to sellers, their posters are a hot item. Have they become teen idols?
Boyband often come with the term 'manufactured'. The're published works do seem overproduced. They're self-production was extensive (Check out the marginal comments that came with their new CD). Many i know argue that is was because they owed it to the fans after their previous scrawny album. They did pack a lot of stuff into it. It was better than Reanimated. I, as well as many others--did buy Meteora as is evident by the impressive number of CD sales.
Their mobs are huge. They consist of admirers of boys and girls. Most admire their muscial skills (Their sound is fucking original!). Some admire their good looks (Chester is so hot!). Others both (Their music's slammin' and they look good too! Skills skills skills!) . *This sounds like previous stories with boybands mentioned earlier*
LP does produce wicked music. I just think that they are now mainstream music. Not that they fit into a category because every band says "We're diffferent because yadda yadda yadda" for they all are in they're own way.

  posted by E.C.tasy @ 5:37 PM

 
This has more to do with physics theory rather than being a debatable topic, because I doubt any of us here has enough knowledge to debate about this concept of dimensional differentiation.

From what I hear from my friend Andrew and his physics teacher, the dimensions overlap. They don't begin, nor do they end. For example, two dimensional objects exist in our world, as do one dimensional objects. In a way, they make up our dimension. Something weird like that.

Another theory is that the fourth and fifth dimensional worlds look over the third dimensions and under. In a way, they may have a way of playing around with our physical world. If they had a way of playing around with our dimension, obviously we would have no way of explaining why those things happen, and Andrew thinks that it's the most probable explanation for the supernatural. We live within the fourth and fifth dimension, but we can't see anything four and five dimensional. It's like boxes. The first dimension is in the center, held within the second dimension, which is held within the third dimension, which is then held by the fourth dimension, and finally the fifth dimension holds all four.

It's an interesting concept. Kinda reminds me of how I believe there's no way we can explain the existence of God, because He exists in a realm that we cannot reach, and a realm that is above our understanding; but He can reach into ours, because our physical nature exists in His realm. Something of the sort.

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 12:25 AM

 
Ok, here's an interesting thought I've been thinking about to myself for a while. What characteristics are required to form a new level of dimensional existence. I'm not relating this to the previous topic about reality and exsitence, but what does it take to make one dimension different from another. We as human really only experience the 3rd dimension, meaning everything we encounter has a length, width, and depth to some degree. We know that the first dimension is a single dot. It's not easy to imagine cause we as humans can only produce a dot as small as the tip of whatever it is we use to make the dot. But a dot nonetheless. It only has 1 dimension. The second demension is the one we're more familiar with, like in mathematical geometry. Squares, circles, triangles, etc. They have a length and a width but we can't really reproduce this. A single sheet of paper comes decently close but the edge of the paper has a slight depth to it, making it 3 dimensional. The third dimension, as I already mentioned is composed of cubes, pyramids, spheres, and basically everything we exist in.

The next two dimensions are the ones that are less understood and known cause they're more complicated, namely Time and Space. Time is the fourth dimension, where as the name dictates, time in itself is altered or exists. That's where we get the idea of time travel from, along with Einstein's whole E=mc2 thing. Space is the less known fifth dimension and it's in this dimension that the concept of space exists or is altered. This is where we get the concept of moving from point A to point B without having to actually travel that distance.

In anycase, the thing I was wondering was where does one dimension end and where does the next one begin.

  posted by JW @ 10:37 PM

 
Yer funny, Temp; yea, it's complicated, and unless you want some more clarifications, I will discuss this no further.

I don't know why I brought up the whole reality concept anyway. I guess I just wanted to see what other people had to say, and perhaps enlighten me with new perspectives. Thanks for the debate, Jon. The existence idea was something to think about, for sure.

So now, someone come up with a new debate. We need a fresh topic to consider.

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 1:03 AM

 
Suffice to say, Kay has made this debate topic convininetly undebatable. Simply because if we are required to answer the question of illusions fully before being able to define reality and/or existence, then such an answer does not exist because we are never going to be able to confirm whether or not what we are or detect are illusions.

But in answer to a previous question on Kay's post, yes, I believe that on the whole of existence, anything people can conjure up and imagine with your minds is real and existent. It is part of reality, but not one that we can detect conciously; or perhaps it is. If for example, dreams are created through our brains sending out different signals due to what we have been able to conciously detect during waking hours, then dreams exist as those signals. And those signals are interpreted into dreams by our minds turning these signals into something that is detectable subconsiously by the 5 senses (sound, sight, etc).

  posted by JW @ 10:09 PM

 
I just thought of something.

Like what Morpheus said in the Matrix, if reality is what we can sense, then reality is merely electrical signals existing in our brain. That's a little.. odd. For something can possess, but how do we know this possession of tangible objects isn't an illusion? I keep stressing this, because we can never know if we're merely dreaming. I'm talking to you and exchanging ideas with you, but how do you know I'm actually here? What if I'm just a subconscious side of your brain, debating about different perspectives of the way you are able to perceive reality?

For example, how do you know that the table on which you write it real? People see things they want to see, hear what they want to hear, twist things to satisfy what they want. To what extreme can this possibility reach?

Just a thought.

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 1:44 PM

 
So Jon and I approached the whole idea of reality with two different perspectives.

My way of defining it had a lot to do with what we consider real, what we consider illusions, and basically what we know and don't now - meaning we can never define reality.

Jon figured reality to be anything that exists, possessing an essence, regardless of the form of that essence and regardless of whether we know it to be there or not (I'm trying to state the theory in one line here. Do correct me or touch up anything I misstated.).

So does that mean that anything people can conjure up and imagine with their minds is real and existant? Are dreams real incidents? They possess and exist. Does that make them a person's reality?

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 2:40 AM

 
Erhm, ok I'm gonna post this in dialogue format, in an attempt to recreate the debate Kay and myself had.

Jonathan: a person, thing, entity, or event that posseses actuality, existence, or essence.

Jonathan: if you can tear that apart, then there aren't any words that can be used to describe it unless we invent words

Kay: so define existence

Kay: or essence

Kay: you can define existence

Kay: what does it mean to exist?

Jonathan: to possess

Kay: so possess?

Kay: to possess

Kay: ...

Kay: that's vague. to possess what?

Jonathan: doesn't matter; just the act of possessing defines it as existence

Jonathan: and it's vague cause existence is vague

Kay: but how do we know that what we possess isn't an illusion?

Jonathan: because possession isn't a thing

Kay: possession.

Kay: but possess what? something tangible? something that's not tangible? of what essence are you refering to? cuz only then can you really say you possess anything

Jonathan: not necessarily; you can possess anything, a quality, a feeling, anything

Jonathan: just the mere fact that you possess defines existence cause you have to exist to possess

Kay: and that's a good point actually... cuz that's how i know i exist

Kay: you know how descartes days

Kay: "i think, therefore i am"

Kay: it makes perfect sense

Jonathan: cognito ergo sum in latin. but yeah

Kay: yup

Jonathan: that's the best answer I can give you

Kay: so reality is anything that exists

Jonathan: I guess, and to exist, you must possess

So there you have it with the word possess cropping up 15 or so times. That's probably the best answer I can come up with.

  posted by JW @ 11:36 PM

 
I know what you mean, Jon. Most people define reality to be what they consider reality, just to give themselves a peace of mind. They take what they know and what they can understand, and then mold it all into a lump of what they can be satisfied with to be existence. Of course, everyone knows and are capable of comprehending trillions of varieties of things, which is why the essence of reality is so difficult to define.

So what makes things actually exist? What is existence? The mere fact that it's just there does not define it, because as many philosophers teach, our senses are unreliable to certain extents. There have been studies where people are in acoma, and their minds are living out a life of its own while they are unconscious. Is that reality? Is what they see while in acoma real? Do those objects and persons in the dreams exist? This is where things complicate themselves; are we living out a dream, or are we truly conscious?

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 2:02 AM

 
Ok ok, like I said in my last post, the 5 senses thing is if you bring the defintion down to something on a more human level. Strictly speaking, reality is a person, thing, entity, or even that posses actuality, exsitence, or essence.

  posted by JW @ 8:23 PM

 
Reality is far more complex and far more pure than what humans can detect through their five senses. Think of it this way. If it weren't for technology, we would not be able to measure radioactivity, because it cannot be sensed through our own bodily functions. The only way we would know it to exist would to be to witness the damage caused by radioactivity. With this simple example, I am truly convinced that there are other essences and occurances existing all around us that we are unable to detect.

What we are able to sense through our five senses, then, is NOT reality. Our five senses become signals of electric charges in our brain, and that's not reality. Perhaps it is OUR reality, but it is not reality. Two words: the Matrix.

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 5:50 PM

 
Strictly on the spiritual level, reality is a person, thing, entity, or event that possess actuality, existence, or essence. If you want to limit the definition down to something that is less than a spiritual level, reality is a person, thing, entity, or event that possess actuality, existence, or essence that can be detected by either of the 5 common senses, or the less common 6th one.

  posted by JW @ 10:46 PM

 
Sorry Jon. I deleted your answer to my question of E's whereabouts cuz it was supposed to be rhetorical.

So now I answer your question.
Just because someone leaves no traces or remains it does not mean that they have not existed. People exist regardless of whether or not anyone remembers them. If they don't, then does that mean that the thousands of cave men and women, individually, never existed? No one alive now knows them, nor are there remains of each individual in history. They have decomposed into soil, carbon, minerals, God knows what. They are no longer recognizable, but they have still existed at one point or another.

Now let me pose another question.
What is reality? What is REAL?

  posted by MsKarenAu @ 3:20 AM