Search results

No Proxy, I'm perfect. But for realz, I'll even edit quotes so they're grammatically correct or without spelling errors. ;)

Actually not at all.:) I was referring to the Kuu/ Hawkeye trollfest. And I don't hate you. To be honest, I think you have potential here... you just need to slow down and make sure your spelling/ punctuation is correct, if only because I'm partially anal-retentive.

Off topic, but my room mate last year was going for the world record in nipple hair length...

Only if I'm Batman... You can be Robin :cool: Context in this thread = on a philosophical level; that is, outside of mathematics. Does it mean an incomprehensibly large amount of options, or does it mean an incomprehensibly large number? What does this mean? I don't understand :confused...

Yerp. I still think it's fun to think about though. I'm familiar. To be honest, I think it's kind of stupid. Yerp. *Googles Graham's number* Nice, I didn't know that was a thing. So it's pointless? Lol Yeah, I understand the usefulness of infinity in mathematics. I've taken a few calc...

"IF space is infinite"... Get your head out of your ass.

I feel the same way about Neil DeGrasse Tyson. I honestly only put the video up because it was pertinent and I remembered seeing it after thinking about this for a while: not because I particularly like Michio Kaku. Yeah, I think that's what I was getting at (I was admittedly exhausted when I...

I can model. We could have a 'sexy selfies' thread...

Seconded. Seriously, don't waste your time here. Read this post and leave.

I've been here only a while, so maybe my word isn't relevant, but: If some of the older members are complaining that the forum is dying, perhaps they should step up and lead it in the right direction. If some of the newer members are complaining that the forum is dying, perhaps they should...

This I can attest to. I'm Ni-dom and blunt dismissal is generally my most often used form of denial. (Always backed up with ample evidence, of course)

BigApplePi Simply because your avatar is infinity and I feel like you may give me some insight here.

A quick question to throw out, hopefully to spark some interesting debate. As a side note I'll accept my position as unofficial philosopher of the forum after stumbling upon a strikingly similar thought process between Thomas Nagel and I. I've actually used this exact comparison when...

DING DING DING! We have a winner :D

Not particularly - every now and again I'll find a song that tickles my fancy, though. My friend has been trying to get me into Daft Punk but... meh

What is the name of the song in your signature? I like it.

With what I've seen of you, Architect's analysis ^^ and the general consensus of the forum, I'm also on board with ISTP. If anything, this is simply for the fact that, like Architect said, you rarely seem to get into the nitty gritty details, and prefer to store the general picture in your...

Bingo And @ OP, welcome to the forum:kodama1:

Interestingly enough, I was having the same problem (kind of) that you were with a certain someone. I feel like I handled it adequately enough; when people are attempting to argue using fallacious statements and personal insults rather than hard logic, you just need to be stern and make them...

Montresor Lol I noticed that too :storks:

The remark was made simply for shitz and gigz. Sometimes I like to sound crazy on purpose. Then I have to decide whether or not I actually believe what I just wrote. The jury is still out.:crazy0: I lol'ed at this :D

Every time I see that my eyes instantly gravitate towards "gorilla warfare". *imagines gorillas with guns* O_O Lol

I personally believe that nothing exists (or at least that our understanding of reality is far from accurate). I'm probably in the minority here, though. *Catches brick* I'll have you know I played several years of little league.

I build a castle of logic-adjusted emotion based on a foundation of intuition in order to manifest my heartfelt ideals in not-so concrete reality. Unless that reality is literally concrete, in which reality = concrete.

Taking your question literally, they can do everything, since someone is obviously not bound to a predetermined fate because of some classification system :p Taking your question the way you intended: I've spent enough time on this forum to give a general sense of my personality to you all...

Truth is indeed a creation of human creativity. However, I don't really think that gets to the point of what I mean by objective truth. I guess I would define truth as something that is not subject to variation. Whether or not this exists in reality (using the term lightly) or only as a...

I don't consider it a problem: quite to the contrary.

The Egyptians were about 6,000 years before their time

As a likely INFJ I rue this post :aufsmaul: @Duxwing

Your argument comes from a humanistic standpoint; you are essentially attempting to logically disprove something that by definition defies logic. For objective truth to exist, it must do so outside the realm of human comprehension. Therefore, it is meaningless to attempt to apply logic to a...

What makes you certain no objective truth exists? Wouldn't the assertion (of either side, really) be in compromise to the very theorems that you've just used? That's fairly bold, especially coming from you, Dux. I also think it should be known that this change in perspective is very recent...

So, I've had some time to think about it, and my (somewhat) recent experience with hallucinogenic compounds (P. cubensis to be exact) seemed to be eerily similar to experiences I've personally and purposefully induced on myself - without the aide of hallucinogenic drugs. If you're interested...

Not without more data!

I understand this. But as Dux said, to fully understand something, you must break it down to the least complex and most basic properties. Even if that involves using something that does not actually exist. I'm using the terminology, again, simply because it's easier to talk about...

I've gotten so many answers here I don't know what to do... It's gone from being the peak of the wave to the whole wave to the mid-line of the wave to the wave not even being a sound and back again. Is this at least close? In this scenario, you are perceiving the entire wave, but the tone...

Maybe this is completely wacky, but does the wave physically interact with the air column it produces? Is the number of columns produced per second (and thus the tone) simply the number of times the wave cuts into the column of air as it passes through from either side? Every time it passes...

So then, in theory, the sound we hear (read: perceive) is running along the x-axis with slope 0? Just double checking. Perhaps my thought process is correct then... So, to reiterate again: The pressure oscillation (sine wave) produces a sound (straight line) that splits the sine wave down the...

Your information is incredibly useful for me and I plan on digging through it tomorrow; it's late now, and the question I was trying to ask, although related to your material, is not exactly what I was getting at. Let it be known that I'm not INTP (and thus not an overly analytical person)...

Thank you! I was completely misunderstanding the graph that I presented. Turns out that because of that, the underlying point has been demolished. The question I was going to ask is irrelevant in this context. I apologize for this, however, there is some very useful information in this...

Ack, this may have to do with the technicality of the graph. Hawkeye said: I was under the assumption that the troughs of the graph were just the lowest point in the vibration, and that the peaks were the highest point in the vibration, and that the average of these highs and lows (and...

Bingo. It is perceived as a single audible sound. Think about that for a bit. Now, I'll try to explain what I want answered here. The sound as a physical body (the wave) is one of many (infinite?) waves. We perceive that wave (via all the great ear stuff) as a single audible sound. Where on...

So, I think you're trying to point out that there is a transition from hearing to perceiving? I understand that; it's the same with seeing and perceiving - there's that gap (however small) in between your eyes collecting the light and your brain making sense of it. I have some pretty cool...

So, our perception of the wave is only of the top peaks? I'm confused. What about the bottom peaks? Why aren't they registered? What about all the points in the wave in between peaks? Are those just thrown out? That doesn't make sense to me.

You are correct, it does not. I think you may understand what I'm getting at here? The underlying question, although it can be applied to this specific scenario, is of a much broader scope and of a much more important ilk.

This is almost exactly what the root of this thread is about. Anywho, you understand the question I'm asking, I think. How is it that all of those waves (technically speaking, an infinite amount of waves?) produce only one audible sound? Is the sound that we hear even a wave that is produced...

What part of option 3? All of it? So your brain takes the wave and formats it into electrical energy, giving the perception of sound?

My apologies, I just invited a bunch of people that I thought would be interested in this. You are very much welcomed :) Yes, that is what I meant. My physics lingo is not up to par. No, I think you understand me. I am concerned about the perception of the sound, as well as the physical...

And, for a catalyst... @Architect @Duxwing @thehabitatdoctor @SpaceYeti @BigApplePi Montresor

This is just a short question applicable to physics that I can't seem to find the answer to in Google. Let's just say that a stereo emits a sound of frequency A, where the wavelength follows your typical sin curve like so: It is my understanding that the wave reverberates back and forth...

Welcome! Don't worry, many of us here are 'socially retarded'. I see you've met Dux: He's our unofficial hug giver here. Feel free to hug him back, or not.