|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 11, 2022 9:50:59 GMT
Indeed, there are many optical illusions we can see. Even a women in love with us can be look like ugly if we spot her from not a good angle. I mean there are lots of photos girls just trash, and don't show anyone else. What if there are no beautiness? What if the ugliest person can be the most beautiful if a photographer or a stylist can work on his look more better, maybe using some modern technologies? I think it's not impossible. I'd say that beautiness is something the same as money. If a person looks pretty he can get a job faster, he's got more friends, and the success follows this person everywhere. But as soon as this person stops being beauty almost everyone looses the interest to the one, and start another hunting for another victim of their adorness. If it was my will I'll try to make all the people be beauty. This isn't fair if there are ugly people and socieities refuse them. Maybe ugly people deserve more better, than the beauty... Well, I don't know, what do you think?
|
|
|
Post by karl on May 12, 2022 1:30:43 GMT
Indeed, there are many optical illusions we can see. Even a women in love with us can be look like ugly if we spot her from not a good angle. I mean there are lots of photos girls just trash, and don't show anyone else. What if there are no beautiness? What if the ugliest person can be the most beautiful if a photographer or a stylist can work on his look more better, maybe using some modern technologies? I think it's not impossible. I'd say that beautiness is something the same as money. If a person looks pretty he can get a job faster, he's got more friends, and the success follows this person everywhere. But as soon as this person stops being beauty almost everyone looses the interest to the one, and start another hunting for another victim of their adorness. If it was my will I'll try to make all the people be beauty. This isn't fair if there are ugly people and socieities refuse them. Maybe ugly people deserve more better, than the beauty... Well, I don't know, what do you think?
What we find beautiful is what allows us to project our inner ideals on. This requires that what we observe doesn't dictate what our mind sees. Like how pauses are an essential part of music, lack of elaborate detail is a premise for beauty. Disney characters that are drawn to be beautiful are beautiful for the beauty they suggest, with large spaces in one single colour, with few or no details. Because our minds already have a conception of female beauty, it recognizes instantly what a drawing of a princess is meant to represent.
A person's face is much more beautiful in the light of bonfire, than up close in high resolution with full lighting. When the mind is given insufficient information to form a complete image, it fills the gap based on its inner reference frame.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 12, 2022 5:58:12 GMT
Indeed, there are many optical illusions we can see. Even a women in love with us can be look like ugly if we spot her from not a good angle. I mean there are lots of photos girls just trash, and don't show anyone else. What if there are no beautiness? What if the ugliest person can be the most beautiful if a photographer or a stylist can work on his look more better, maybe using some modern technologies? I think it's not impossible. I'd say that beautiness is something the same as money. If a person looks pretty he can get a job faster, he's got more friends, and the success follows this person everywhere. But as soon as this person stops being beauty almost everyone looses the interest to the one, and start another hunting for another victim of their adorness. If it was my will I'll try to make all the people be beauty. This isn't fair if there are ugly people and socieities refuse them. Maybe ugly people deserve more better, than the beauty... Well, I don't know, what do you think?
What we find beautiful is what allows us to project our inner ideals on. This requires that what we observe doesn't dictate what our mind sees. Like how pauses are an essential part of music, lack of elaborate detail is a premise for beauty. Disney characters that are drawn to be beautiful are beautiful for the beauty they suggest, with large spaces in one single colour, with few or no details. Because our minds already have a conception of female beauty, it recognizes instantly what a drawing of a princess is meant to represent.
A person's face is much more beautiful in the light of bonfire, than up close in high resolution with full lighting. When the mind is given insufficient information to form a complete image, it fills the gap based on its inner reference frame.
I would agree on that that we have got the concepts of beauty in our minds. At least somehow babies or infants eat certain food, and some food they don't accept. It also happens that the babies or infants can recognize something, and something left for them in shadows. But there is a problem I cannot understand. Are such concepts psychological? Why do I ask that? Because if these concepts are consciousness, then why the babies or infants can use them in such a small age? I mean their minds are not capable of that, or are capable? I guess that to extract such a concept some work must be put, but is it enough power for an infant to use it? At the end, I think, this thought can lead us to the question of how spermatosoids live and do they have any concepts? Because where those concepts start appearing in our bodies? This is very interesting, because if such concepts are always with us then, either souls exist, or the matter (liquid stuff of spermatosoids, etc) have all these concepts. But I rather think that if the carrier of the concept - is the mind, then in case of spermatosoids, it must be the matter itself. And in this time it looks like chemistry... P.S. I do apologize for being not clearly in writing, and making mistakes.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,698
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on May 12, 2022 7:17:20 GMT
Everything you see is an optical illusion. It's just light bouncing off of stuff entering your eyes. And that's not even getting into the weirdness of quantum physics.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 12, 2022 8:14:47 GMT
Everything you see is an optical illusion. It's just light bouncing off of stuff entering your eyes. And that's not even getting into the weirdness of quantum physics. Do you mean that the quantum physics is also some kind of an optical illusion? Is this what do you mean? I don't know much about it. If I'm not wrong, karl knows the quantum physics.
|
|
|
Post by karl on May 12, 2022 21:25:40 GMT
Eugene 2.0 As I've referred to before, I think some concepts are fundamental and universal. But biology and culture are parts of determining positive feelings we attach to combinations of those concepts. For example, one can often find the golden ratio in what we see as beautiful, but what each person sees as beautiful varies greatly. If aliens landed on this earth and a man tried to explain to an alien what he saw as beautiful in women, the alien might not relate to 95% of it, but perhaps acknowledge that curves and symmetry are somehow attractive.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,698
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on May 13, 2022 3:06:53 GMT
Everything you see is an optical illusion. It's just light bouncing off of stuff entering your eyes. And that's not even getting into the weirdness of quantum physics. Do you mean that the quantum physics is also some kind of an optical illusion? Is this what do you mean? I don't know much about it. If I'm not wrong, karl knows the quantum physics. I'm talking about the double slit experiment where atoms are basically just waves until something observes them and they solidify into balls (could be butchering this, if I'm wrong someone let me know). The implication of this is that the universe is like one of those videogames where game world doesn't exist really until the player enters it and observes it and it renders into view.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 13, 2022 10:54:50 GMT
Do you mean that the quantum physics is also some kind of an optical illusion? Is this what do you mean? I don't know much about it. If I'm not wrong, karl knows the quantum physics. I'm talking about the double slit experiment where atoms are basically just waves until something observes them and they solidify into balls (could be butchering this, if I'm wrong someone let me know). The implication of this is that the universe is like one of those videogames where game world doesn't exist really until the player enters it and observes it and it renders into view. You're right. It really is as a game... oh, my, I never thought of that before... Indeed, there are just 000111 (bits or bites), and if someone switch on the console everything turns eventually into the gameplay... I wonder can the aliens use the same universe as we are, but viewing it in their own way? Like, you know, for me PS5 is a console for videogames, but for my younger brother (I don't have any, it's for the example) it is a blackbox, and for my dog (I also don't have a dog now) it's just a toy as a plastic bone, but bigger ... This is the very interesting point of view...
|
|
|
Post by karl on May 14, 2022 1:15:03 GMT
Do you mean that the quantum physics is also some kind of an optical illusion? Is this what do you mean? I don't know much about it. If I'm not wrong, karl knows the quantum physics. I'm talking about the double slit experiment where atoms are basically just waves until something observes them and they solidify into balls (could be butchering this, if I'm wrong someone let me know). The implication of this is that the universe is like one of those videogames where game world doesn't exist really until the player enters it and observes it and it renders into view.
The double slit experiment is done with electrons, and electrons are considered to be point particles when measured. So one does not assume they have a diameter like a ball. However, quantum uncertainty also applies for particles that are considered to be extended in space, like protons.
Before measured, they're not waves as a physical form which then changes into a particle when measured. The wave is a probability wave, and describes the chance for where to find the particle when measured. Prior to measurement, the position of the particle isn't determined. This is why there are limits to how fast silicon based microchips can be. Because of quantum uncertainty, the uncertainty of where an electron is sets a limit to how small space it can be confined to.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 14, 2022 4:36:50 GMT
I'm talking about the double slit experiment where atoms are basically just waves until something observes them and they solidify into balls (could be butchering this, if I'm wrong someone let me know). The implication of this is that the universe is like one of those videogames where game world doesn't exist really until the player enters it and observes it and it renders into view.
The double slit experiment is done with electrons, and electrons are considered to be point particles when measured. So one does not assume they have a diameter like a ball. However, quantum uncertainty also applies for particles that are considered to be extended in space, like protons.
Before measured, they're not waves as a physical form which then changes into a particle when measured. The wave is a probability wave, and describes the chance for where to find the particle when measured. Prior to measurement, the position of the particle isn't determined. This is why there are limits to how fast silicon based microchips can be. Because of quantum uncertainty, the uncertainty of where an electron is sets a limit to how small space it can be confined to.
In school I was told the position of electrons were like clouds. It's quite the same as asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter in our Galaxy. We cannot define a position of an asteroid , while it's not impossible to find its chance to be present in a certain area. What I don't understand is that what exactly makes an electron cannot be seen by our tools? A human's presence? Maybe it's because of the invisible beams that come from the eyes of the observers? Or maybe cameras are out of speed limits to registrate the electron by itself? Or maybe it is because of the calculus that isn't unlimited and brings us only uncertain information? Sorry for asking you about this not once, but I still cannot understand this and some other things. If Clovis would like to hear the answer, then I would join him too. And also an additional question – may we hope to find the precise location of an election having new more powerful methods somewhere in future?
|
|
|
Post by karl on May 14, 2022 5:06:21 GMT
Eugene 2.0 The problem with seeing the electron is the same as with determining its location. Let's say you shoot photons at an electron to establish its location. Photons are themselves waves before their location is determined, and the less energy a photon has, the longer the wavelength. So if a photon with a long wavelength hits an electron, there is little precision as to where it hit it, since the long wavelength extends the possibilities for where its located before measured. But if a photon with a short wavelength, like gamma rays, hits an electron, it will hit it with such a high energy that the electron will be subjected to strong acceleration. So while you'd be able to determine with high accuracy where it was when it was hit, the impact has made its momentum far less certain.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,698
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on May 14, 2022 6:06:35 GMT
I'm talking about the double slit experiment where atoms are basically just waves until something observes them and they solidify into balls (could be butchering this, if I'm wrong someone let me know). The implication of this is that the universe is like one of those videogames where game world doesn't exist really until the player enters it and observes it and it renders into view.
The double slit experiment is done with electrons, and electrons are considered to be point particles when measured. So one does not assume they have a diameter like a ball. However, quantum uncertainty also applies for particles that are considered to be extended in space, like protons.
Before measured, they're not waves as a physical form which then changes into a particle when measured. The wave is a probability wave, and describes the chance for where to find the particle when measured. Prior to measurement, the position of the particle isn't determined. This is why there are limits to how fast silicon based microchips can be. Because of quantum uncertainty, the uncertainty of where an electron is sets a limit to how small space it can be confined to.
Ah, well, didn't butcher it too badly at least. Just took things a bit too literally. Science is not a great point of interest to me. I know the basics but have not been motivated to research deeply into it.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 15, 2022 10:02:00 GMT
Indeed, there are many optical illusions we can see. Even a women in love with us can be look like ugly if we spot her from not a good angle. I mean there are lots of photos girls just trash, and don't show anyone else. What if there are no beautiness? What if the ugliest person can be the most beautiful if a photographer or a stylist can work on his look more better, maybe using some modern technologies? I think it's not impossible. I'd say that beautiness is something the same as money. If a person looks pretty he can get a job faster, he's got more friends, and the success follows this person everywhere. But as soon as this person stops being beauty almost everyone looses the interest to the one, and start another hunting for another victim of their adorness. If it was my will I'll try to make all the people be beauty. This isn't fair if there are ugly people and socieities refuse them. Maybe ugly people deserve more better, than the beauty... Well, I don't know, what do you think? I don't think beauty gets you as far in the business world as you might think, It will make people favor you and want to keep you around just because they like to be in your presence and if your a woman they will want to keep you around in hopes that they will one day get to have sex with her But that's pretty much the limits of beauty in the business world because if your given responsibility and you can't do your job you will quickly be demoted and replaced with someone that's competent And it will take more to get fired then it would if you were ugly but that tolerance isn't that much and it can easily backfire on you if there's another coworker that's jealous of your beauty .
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on May 15, 2022 10:07:33 GMT
Do you mean that the quantum physics is also some kind of an optical illusion? Is this what do you mean? I don't know much about it. If I'm not wrong, karl knows the quantum physics. I'm talking about the double slit experiment where atoms are basically just waves until something observes them and they solidify into balls (could be butchering this, if I'm wrong someone let me know). The implication of this is that the universe is like one of those videogames where game world doesn't exist really until the player enters it and observes it and it renders into view. Tell me how can we view electrons when they're smaller than atoms and we can't even view atoms because they're too small for light waves to bounce off of? And then upon somehow being able to view these individually we can then observe them going from a wave to a particle to then come to the conclusion that science has? When You really dig deep into that experiment you'll find that they had no way of measuring each individual photon or even dozens of them they had to fire admittedly hundreds of thousands of them through the finest slit they could make which was still about a thousand times larger than an atom and then hypothesized meaning yes what was going on. Call it a desperate attempt not to lose funding or tenure, but hardly an experiment
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 15, 2022 15:10:40 GMT
Indeed, there are many optical illusions we can see. Even a women in love with us can be look like ugly if we spot her from not a good angle. I mean there are lots of photos girls just trash, and don't show anyone else. What if there are no beautiness? What if the ugliest person can be the most beautiful if a photographer or a stylist can work on his look more better, maybe using some modern technologies? I think it's not impossible. I'd say that beautiness is something the same as money. If a person looks pretty he can get a job faster, he's got more friends, and the success follows this person everywhere. But as soon as this person stops being beauty almost everyone looses the interest to the one, and start another hunting for another victim of their adorness. If it was my will I'll try to make all the people be beauty. This isn't fair if there are ugly people and socieities refuse them. Maybe ugly people deserve more better, than the beauty... Well, I don't know, what do you think? I don't think beauty gets you as far in the business world as you might think, It will make people favor you and want to keep you around just because they like to be in your presence and if your a woman they will want to keep you around in hopes that they will one day get to have sex with her But that's pretty much the limits of beauty in the business world because if your given responsibility and you can't do your job you will quickly be demoted and replaced with someone that's competent And it will take more to get fired then it would if you were ugly but that tolerance isn't that much and it can easily backfire on you if there's another coworker that's jealous of your beauty . Yes, I think your addition is helpful. I didn't separated people into categories, but it's true that for certain categories, or types, or groups there might exist some other rules. It is very true. Besides, we are aware of some African tribes with women wearing big plates in their lips, or having many metal circles round their necks as some symbols of beautiness. And I am sure we have to take it into account. For instance, what if I were a man in such a tribe since I was born? I guess I would consider such women to be beauty. Anyway, my question was quite different. I asked if ugly people could be beauty no matter what? I mean could it possible for any person to become indeed beautiful for some people?
|
|