Shwa

Note for kimmie: Rather than simply edit my previous post, I thought I would add this as a sort of slight direction change. Instead of trying to formulate something about direct brain-to-brain on a quantum level, let's look at other influences on the brain, entirely physical, that have quantum implications. This is just an idea of the questions being posed and the fascinating directions some areas of science are starting to go into. This is in relation to birds, but there might be application discovered one day that describes the affects on humans. Of course this is all preliminary, but it does reveal some interesting areas of study. According to the brief bio: Abstract The rest of the paper (PDF)

The problem is, you are skipping over a significant portion of the "transmitted" part, likely the part about being converted to digital form and then moved electronically from one location to another. But it is sufficient that you can see how each 'layer' has a transmitting and reception portion. Can you see that aspect? Are you certain? There appears to be some hesitation here. "Seems likely" "could be" These are speculative terms. For instance, did you view the painting in it's original size format? Was the opacity of the paint apparent? How about the overall construction including brushstrokes, colour selection, etc? It is not c.r's idea as I pointed out earlier when I supplied the links for 'collective consciousness' 'collective unconscious' semiosphere, logosphere, etc. Do you think this might be a case of "...unlikely that receiver has obtained message sender intended?" I think I have acquitted myself well in this area. Repeatedly. What I see c.r talking about is that everything - all matter and energy - including any brain energy, thoughts, ions, etc. as existing in a reality at the quantum level which does not distinguish between any one set of thoughts with another. With the discussion about 'communication paths' I think we are establishing that even at the quantum level context is the distinguising factor. Nope. I think the physical connections to a collective are pretty apparent. No man is an island. You have already proved that any collective intelligence is physical in nature. However, anything 'physical in nature' might be implication through quantum mechanics and, then again, how much of a role does 'nature' play? ie being hard-wired the same will produce similar thinking. What is a collective intelligence formed from then if not some sort of intermediate, phsyical, means? Analysis of what situation? You are putting words in my mouth, feelings in my nerves and thoughts in my mind to suit your own position. Yet none of those words, feelings or thoughts have anything to do with me. It's all you.

Leonardo DaVinci, you, meaning of a smile, Mona Lisa painting Poisoning the well again eh kimmie? {yawn} The fallacy here is Ad Tedium Ut Nex. Whoosh! That 'whooshing' sound you heard was the point going way over your head. Yes, the medium is the message. :lol "Guh" No. Really? Is that what you have been going on about? Then science is not for you since you have made it in your own image.

If by "gist" you mean to say that QM is a description of physical elements yes. If you mean "gist" to refer to "sub-physical" do a google search on the term. QM is in the domain of "physics." Period. Bullshit. Now you are blaming others for your own inadequecy. You are not an idiot GH, take some time to do a little research and you will get it. Photons are a means to communication a la fibre optics. (don't get me started on the medium is the message ) I see light! Yes! Of course they do. But now, think of 'our scale' as one of the layers in a stacked model similar to something like the OSI model where the bottom layer - the furthest we can breakdown the physical world (i.e. as described by quantum mechanics) corresponds to the physical layer of the OSI. It isn't a perfect model, but it might be illustrative. Then, if you can see what I am getting at, we can look at how a communication path between two nodes of that model might have implications at the quantum level.

I am still waiting for that btw. A feeble attempt at intimidation by using the promise of someone's else's expertise to back you up in a time of need. New to the Internet are you? *sidebar to TB: you have made it to the level of Knight in Shining Armour. Enjoy bro!* What the heck are you talking about? I use the OSI model because it is a stacked model for communications with discreet interactive layers at the bottom of which is the description of the fundamental actions of the elements of previous layers. {sigh} That hard for you to grasp wasn't it? Fascinating kimmie since you took my reply completely out of context. Let's review, shall we? Kimmie comes up with this gem: To which Shwa replies: To which kimmie makes some arcane comment about brain portions. No, but it is a part of a possible communication path isn't it? And the operations of your senses are also part of a communication path too yes? And in all of those paths, the application of quantum mechanics is coming into view: quantum biology Do you somehow think that your senses and their constituent parts are somehow exempt from quantum analysis and description? Please do explain that one. Wow. This is from someone who is not "comfortable" with certain aspects of physics. Good for you. The non-existent possibilities is also a function of lack of information too. Unless you would like to proclaim that man cannot live and breathe underwater too? Trust me, discussing physics with you is like a Quantum Entanglement Network.

Nope. I have already stated that I wouldn't be doing it and it was used a reference to a model and a means. Did you not get it? Then you'd be wrong. sub-physical, come on now. You are talking supernatural astral netherworlds now. Did I say they did? It was a question of means. Try and stay focused there GH. Oh good grief... could you just read the damned article please: Physics.

This is a general public forum and not a strict science journal. Plenty of people refer to "quantum particles" including the author of this NASA article , all these articles from eScience News, the editor of Nature.com (an Internation weekly journal of science), and this physics prof from the University of Oregon. The term is in the vernacular bud. Cool. Please elaborate on this thought.

Aye, there's the rub. I have already told you that I am not going to do a QM tracetroute for you. You either know or you don't. If you are not "comfortable" with quantum mechanics and have no desire to become comfortable, I am not going to do your homework for you. You do understand that quarks, bosons and leptons are considered 'physical' do you not? This is why it is called quantum physics. The most fundamental layer of the physical (natural) world. Really? Then what is fibre optics all about? be careful kimmie, the future may pass you by. Really? If photons can be used for the physical layer of a viable communications channel, who knows what applications neutrinos might hold? Subspace radio perhaps? But you don't need to worry about that since you are more occupied with trying to throw a baseball to the moon.

Right. Another soap boxer standing alone on a corner. You like to beef up a poor argument with the spectre of democracy and claim the higher moral ground. Do you know how old that is? Wake up man, its the 21st century and you are using 20th century methods. You reveal more about yourself here than Fantino.

True I think McHale is a douchebag of the lowest order. Not true I like Fantino. I posted that he is highly decorated and experienced. But look a little closer and see that he is not new to controversy. However, I doubt any justice is served by every douchebag that runs screming like a little girl to the courts everytime a cop tells them to bugger-off. Besides, the courts decided, not me, so it isn't my version of justice you should be concerned about.

Agreed. But is telepathy really what c.r is after? I am not sensing that. Saw this very interesting show - PBS or Discovery or something - last week which looked at the similarities between particle physics & mechanics and large body physics & mechanics. No conclusions, but some very interesting inferences.

It isn't a non sequitur because the reference was to the accusations levelled at Harris being far more serious that the mischief levelled at Fantino by a well known douchebag. One would think the more serious accusations would require a more independent and impartial enquiry. Did that happen for Ipperwash? If you consider Linden "neutral" then you wouldn't have any compunction with this deal about Fantino. Interesting comment seeing that to achieve a banana republic many Indians had to be killed and to get out of a banana republic many more Indians were killed.

Yes, just like an ethernet frame doesn't "work" on the application layer of the OSI model. But they are still the part of a coherent communications model. No, particles obey the QM rules even when they are in atoms, molecules or ear hairs. But is the reverse true? No? How about quantum acoustics and phonons. Better yet, the quantum acoustic link says it best: "At the present stage of development of physical science, quantum mechanics is the most fundamental theory of physical phenomena."

Are you talking about government services or marriage?

Hey that is cool - thanks for the links! Kind of like the best of both worlds now and OHIP pays for it where it can. Beauty eh? Kind of like how Ontario pumps surplus electrical power back on the grid for US consumption. One sad part though: I wonder how many Americans are turned away for the same treatments because of little or no health insurance, or go broke getting those same services, while these state health care Canadians come free and clear. Would be an interesting stat.

You could have saved yourself a bit of typing by writing: I think, I talk, they hear. Because that is what you are getting at right? However, why do your vocal chords vibrate? How does "the air" vibrate? And how can vibrations "travel." How does "this" get converted into an electrical signal and why wasn't there an electrical signal between your voice and vocal chord vibrations? And how does your electrical signal mean the same thing as someone else's electrical signal? So many questions, so little time. But you understand why I am using that as a model yes?

OK analyze it. We are talking QM level interactions, so I will, out of necessity, have some QM related questions to ask you once we receive your analysis. Quantum mechanics is all about the physical layer and yet you keep avoiding its implications.

Lowell Green is still going? Wow. I went to school with his daughter and her grandfather, Lowell's dad, gave a very inspirational commencement speech. They are an excellent family. Yes. As a former Ottawa resident, I moved. The last year I was there it went down to -49C on Boxing Day and snowed May 15th. One can only take so much. Love to visit the place though. In the summer.

Which suggests you can remove the man from nature, but you cannot remove nature from the man.

If they didn't for Harris when the OPP shot and killed an umarmed protester at Ipperwash then why should they for Fantino? Seriously now.

Really? That is very interesting. Do you have a link that shows provincial agreements with "US Healthcare" to utilize this excess capacity for "serious gaps?" Thanks.

First, a hilarious quote from Roland Barthes on Jules Verne, "...his work proclaims that nothing can escape man, that the world, even its most distant part, is like an object in his hand, and that, all told, property is but a dialectical moment in the general enslavement of Nature." - Mythologies, 1957 I don't want to tackle the fuzzy social mathematics that justifies the modern gradual tax system we have, but I can say that "noblesse oblige" also includes tax shelters and loopholes that help the higher income earners reduce their tax levels to below the burden as experienced by the average middle class ratepayer. I see the flat tax system as insurance and assurance. And you do have the right, same as everyone else. It is written in your social contract. I think we need to mind the fact that money collected through federal tax also goes to fund the administration agencies at the provincial, municipal and city levels which includes those justice agancies you may interact with. I am betting that you have far more interaction with your muncipal or city government than the federal and thus your wish for a 'small and limited government' is what you already experience. These are the levels of service you wish. As for 'opting out' well, it is cliched, but anyone can move away and try their luck in a nation that is more suitable towards their needs.

Sorry, you missed again. The only things being expressed here are "...thought is not effected by outside influences..." and "...all that brain information can be moved through space freely and combine with other thought energy..." There is no indication of direct node-to-node communications. Sounds more like a broadcast on ethernet. Please do. And don't forget to express the interactions of all the intermediary elements, atoms, particles and energies required to do so since we are talking about QM now. I look forward to your analysis. You're not understanding and are still stuck on the idea of telepathy. Are you familiar with the OSI model for modern network communications? You can have as many nodes (senses) as you like, but no signal, no network.

Don't get me wrong, I believe a 17% flat tax is the way to go. However, I must invoke the philosophical 'no man is an island' rule and test your contention: By the same token, you (i.e. "the citizen') own (i.e. as a shareholder) and demand services, which is what the government produces. So in that light, it is a fair exchange (i.e. taxes for services) wouldn't you agree? The only thing to quibble about is the levels and methods of taxation, but I don't see that in itself as an erosion of private property rights.

Nope, they are a gear in the QM machine. Not sure what 'higher level' refers to though. Interesting notion. Do you mean neutrinos occur at a higher level than other quantum particles?