Fun Stuff > CHATTER
How "normal" do you think you are?
clockworkjames:
I would like to revise my statement - I am just batshit insane.
Or totally normal.
Or somewhere in between, you will all see each other at different levels of normality, now if you will excuse me it is almost 5AM so I must go capture and shave all the bunny rabbits over in the rugby field nearest my house.
himynameisjulien:
What is normal? Is it how well adapted you are to your current situation? How much you are similar to people around you? In that case, from whose point of view do you go by, yours or another's? Whose definition? Maybe I'm completely and utterly normal and everyone around me is completely and utterly "weird", or vice-versa?
OK, I'm done with my questioning of terms.
I'm not really "normal". I do a lot more thinking about metaphysics, philosophy, the origin of the universe, and music than most people I know; with the exception of a one of my teachers. I can't avoid that last one, however, because I can't seem to stop thinking about whichever song I listened to last, which brings up something else: would I be "smarter" if I didn't? Who knows. Maybe I could get a lobotomy and see.
To the "time, real or no" question. If you have read Slaughter-house 5, the theory in that book is similar to what I imagine Mr. "I don't believe in time" is thinking: that all moments exist in parallel, but we cannot see them as such, possibly due to our imposed measurement of time, or that we lack the physical capability to do so. The creatures, in the book, that can perceive time in that manner do not fear death, for they are alive in a myriad other moments, and never cease to exist.
People with ADD and ADHD sometimes perceive time as moving faster or slower if they are absorbed in thought, and, as a result, things that have happened by the time they "come to their senses" appear to have passed impossibly fast; it's a pretty odd feeling.
To les: Is the cat in the box alive or dead? How do you know if no one is observing it? An old, and debatably unanswerable question.
Maybe the square changes to a circle from time to time.
I happen to agree with you, les, but am just presenting another side of the argument.
Has anyone here read the whole Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series? Maybe not all of them, I think this is in the second book. Maybe the first.
The man who rules this galaxy, and maybe others, possibly the entire universe, only believes in what he can see. When he locks Zarniwoop out of his house, and hears his knocking, he thinks that it could be just a product of his imagination, the same view he has of the past. He also says that when the 6 men in ships come to visit him, and thinks they are asking him questions, they could actually be singing to the cat, and he just thinks they are asking him questions. When a few characters I don't care to name arrive in a large white ship, he ponders that it could be the 6 black ships the 6 men arrive in, and that 6 small black ships could look like one large white one under certain circumstances.
The point is, how do you know something exists if you are not perceiving it? Even if you are, maybe your mind is fooling itself.
I happen to think that, for all intents and purposes, this is bogus. The universe acts the way it does, consistently, under our observation, and if it acts differently whilst "alone", it makes no difference to humans.
himynameisjulien:
Ironically, most people picked "not normal" and therefore are normal. The normal ones are now abnormal.
blankfile:
--- Quote from: Papersatan on 03 Jul 2008, 08:45 ---
--- Quote from: Slick on 03 Jul 2008, 05:18 ---
--- Quote from: Papersatan on 02 Jul 2008, 23:16 ---I don't believe in time. No, seriously.
--- End quote ---
Pardon me, but what the hell do you mean?
--- End quote ---
-Cropped for readability
--- End quote ---
You might be interested in the fact there actually exist a logical way to represent time. It's called "Planck's Time". Quoted from wikipedia: "It is the time it would take a photon traveling at the speed of light in a vacuum to cross a distance equal to the Planck length."
As far as science is concerned as of today, this is the most relevant unit of time that exist. Unlike seconds, hours, months, years and such, this unit stays valid throughout all of cosmos. It is also quite valid without any observer, and even valid in a hypothetical high-gravity zone in which time is dilated. Sadly, this unit does not (an actually, nothing that i know of does) give any insight on the quantum phases of reality (IE: Schroedinger's cat).
But i have to agree on how the units we use on Earth to depict time are extremely outdated and should be reviewed. Then again, there are still people who refuse to use the metric system (Here, insert some facepalm.jpg or any other source of abyssal dismay), so it's not gonna happen in my lifetime.
Now on to the topic at hand, i think that the above paragraphs are a sad depiction of my "normality". For reference's sake, i use the behavioral definition of "normal", stolen directly from wikipedia:
--- Quote ---In behavior, normal refers to a lack of significant deviation from the average.
--- End quote ---
By this definition, i believe i can achieve a > 90% ratio of abnormality:
-I don't even HAVE a TV, i don't have a car. Not because i can't afford them, but because i do not wish to have either.
-I dislike most social events with the exception of music shows.
-I don't follow the magic trend of having to find a reproduction partner as soon as possible to trigger some hormonal release. Been there, done that, got bored.
-I consider most sports as barbarism.
-I listen to wacky music, and i love it.
-I'm not racist, sexist, homophobic nor show any kind of discriminatory behavior towards other . And say whatever you want, the average joes are.
-I'm actually very interested in science, in fact, i'm more interested in science than pretty much anything else.
But, this being said, i do conform to some norms, mainly on clothing, as a concession to satiate my lust for science. Hence the ~90%
So yeah, i am not "normal". And i am totally proud of it. :evil:
himynameisjulien:
Does any unit of measurement of anything relate to the quantum phases of reality?
That would be kind of impossible.
I believe a second is valid throughout the entire cosmos as well. I believe it's 9,192,631,770 (may or may not be the right number, wikipedia) cycles (waves of the radiation given off) of caesium at rest temperature, with 0 magnetic or other interference. That is how atomic clocks work.
I got about half of that from wikipedia, and am wondering if radiation is even given off at rest temperature. Doesn't all motion cease?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version