pocker_machine
@pocker_machine@lemmy.world
- Comment on 4th dimension doesn't exist because even 1D or 2D themselves are not real. 1 week ago:
with its own unique laws of physics
I never thought of it like that. I thought laws of physics as laws of evening. Nice thought. Thanks for response.
- Comment on 4th dimension doesn't exist because even 1D or 2D themselves are not real. 1 week ago:
I believe you
- Comment on 4th dimension doesn't exist because even 1D or 2D themselves are not real. 1 week ago:
Ah that’s interesting. I didn’t think of them as separate universes.
My point still holds though. I mean, we call 3D as 3D because of 1D and 2D. Since they don’t exist in our reality (but of course they are mathematically useful). One could still argue that since it cannot be perceived, it’s not real.
May be this is some form of nihilistic thought too 🙂
- Comment on 4th dimension doesn't exist because even 1D or 2D themselves are not real. 1 week ago:
Well it’s a public forum, one specifically for thought experiment that too. I’m not trying to claim anything. I’d be happy to be proved wrong too.
Your response is basically “I don’t have an answer for you but sushh”. I don’t have anything else for you pal, may be try to approach things a little open minded and less condescending.
- Comment on 4th dimension doesn't exist because even 1D or 2D themselves are not real. 1 week ago:
Ok. Hear me out.
We draw a line on a sheet of paper. That line only has x and y dimensions mathematically.
BUT
That line is a thin layer of ink. It is on a paper which has a width (however small it be). To explain 2 dimensions we abstracted the whole thing as 2D when in fact it is 3D.
There are no dimensions, there are just mathematical abstractions which helps us think. But there is no proof of a physical object in 1D or 2D.
- Comment on 4th dimension doesn't exist because even 1D or 2D themselves are not real. 1 week ago:
This text or drawing is not really 2D. Down at the atomic/molecular level they are still 3D particles. We add just abstracting it as 2D.
- Submitted 1 week ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 32 comments
- Comment on When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God. 3 weeks ago:
I’ll leave you to your thoughts. Have a good day
- Comment on When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God. 3 weeks ago:
Interesting. Yes we are reducing the not knowable to knowable, which is moot.
- Comment on When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God. 3 weeks ago:
Interesting
- Comment on When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God. 3 weeks ago:
I’m not saying there is one. It’s just a thought experiment
- Comment on When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God. 3 weeks ago:
Yes exactly
- Comment on When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God. 3 weeks ago:
I understand we would. I just left a shower thought on the possibility that an entity, if exists, called God would. Not trying to be pedantic here, just an amusing thought. 🙂
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 14 comments
- Comment on "Quell your rage" must be lesson 1 in how to internet 2 months ago:
Ah. I got baited 😆
- Comment on "Quell your rage" must be lesson 1 in how to internet 2 months ago:
💯
- Comment on "Quell your rage" must be lesson 1 in how to internet 2 months ago:
You mean it doesn’t exist ? Perhaps I should be clear since I wrote just two lines.
If you take top comments on any (even non political) popular posts, there will be someone posting an intentionally controversial, yet unrelated, comment. I guess it boosts engagement of the post, or the commenter gets karma (or whatever fake points) or just some lunatics doing it for the kick of it. The problem is most people reacting to such comments doesn’t realise they were just baited into it.
Hence the thought in the shower 🚿
- Submitted 2 months ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 24 comments
- Comment on The universe has no concept of happiness or sadness. It is up to us to find things that make us happy (or sad if that's what we want). 2 months ago:
At first, drowsy me read the whole thing after reading the first line as “Teri Hatcher”.
- Submitted 2 months ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 21 comments
- Comment on AI can kill information 2 months ago:
Unpopular opinion - yes but not exactly
Searching the web is/was always like making a prompt. The difference before the current AI hype was that it was a different kind of algorithm, but still an algorithm tailored to make profit for the company. Or in other words, it was never in the user’s control on what information is received from the web. That is the nature of the web itself until, to some extent, we hopefully reach a dystopian decentralised non profit web. And hey we might even get there because you are reading this on Lemmy.
- Comment on Please remember to spread the word about this :( 2 months ago:
So to not die, we just need to stop breathing !
- Comment on Socialism is the actual teaching of Jesus 2 months ago:
To be clear, OP is not questioning the validity either. You are, and that’s a separate discussion.
If I tell you “playing with fire is risky”, and then you bring up an old book to me where is it written “playing with fire is risky”, the discussion is not about whether I told you that from the book. It is not about whether my advice is valid or the book is valid. The discussion is just that people who had read the book should have already known “playing with fire is risky”.
- Comment on Socialism is the actual teaching of Jesus 2 months ago:
I’m not religious. But your point doesn’t make sense. Being around X number of years doesn’t contradict with the possibility of one idea being a part of the other. I guess that’s what the user is trying to say, but I’m not sure how factual it is.
- Comment on Your TV Is Spying On You 2 months ago:
I think you meant - Me Xbox is spying on my instead.
- Comment on Why don't people like Melon Tusk get tired of the shit they gave you pull through literally every day ? I mean doesn't the guilt of bad decisions pull them down enough like the rest of us ? 3 months ago:
Oh sorry I didn’t think of that. I was just using his name in a funny way. Besides my intention were about people like him, but the discussion went about him anyways.
- Comment on Why don't people like Melon Tusk get tired of the shit they gave you pull through literally every day ? I mean doesn't the guilt of bad decisions pull them down enough like the rest of us ? 3 months ago:
On the face of it, it looks like that. It probably is that.
But if we think about it for a moment. He is a person after all. Brushes teeth, eats, po*p s like everyone else. And it is sometimes when we do these mundane things in our lives, we just think. At least during some of those moments there would be some self reflection. Everyone has something to be guilty about. It’s just that these kind of people have a lot of options in that area. So I’m wondering if they are just in denial. And that is such a sad superpower to have.
- Comment on Why don't people like Melon Tusk get tired of the shit they gave you pull through literally every day ? I mean doesn't the guilt of bad decisions pull them down enough like the rest of us ? 3 months ago:
True, but still, by getting used to does it mean they don’t bring cringe inducing memories to themselves. I know the feeling when some of mine bottle up once in a while. But I can’t imagine how much they would be for people like him and Orange Bob. It is superhuman level of self tolerance.
- Submitted 3 months ago to nostupidquestions@lemmy.world | 49 comments
- Comment on Are We All Becoming More Hostile Online? 4 months ago:
Man, this is sacred. This should be the first line in Intro to Internet.