We are 3 dimensional beings.
We can only see, prove and examine what is 1D, 2D and 3D.
We cannot prove 4D exists because we exist in 3D.
If we are 3D beings, could there be 4D beings that can see, prove and examine 4D, 3D, 2D and 1D.
Technically we're 4D creatures though, and we can affect/change 1/2/3D but can only percieve 4D without the capacity to interact with it.
It would therefore be an assumption that a 5th dimensional being would be capable of directly interacting with 1/2/3/4th dimensions but only be capable of perceiving the 5th. Then again, that's from a rather woefully small sample group (of ONE) so it's not like yeu can see a pattern emerge from a single example.
People beat me to most of whot soujiro said soooo I'll cover the parts that're left XD
How do you explain psychics? Science has acknowledged their "abilities", and when they give readings they aren't taking random guesses, so how are they able to do what they do?
Can someone explain that to me using logic?
Psychics aren't really psychic for the most part. We may have some vague connection to one another, but it's not likely to be in the depth that is understood there.
Instead, a great example is too look at David Blaine, who has performed seemingly miraculous 'psychic' effects of reading minds... except he himself explains it's not about being psychic at all, but rather, in learning to read body language. We all have subtle "tells", where we unconsciously do something very small and seemingly minor; a twitch of the mouth, a smile, a tremor of an eyebrow, the eyes looking a particular direction... this's a very complex science used by interrogators. Looking one direction while attempting to answer a question means the brain is attempting to access its' memory portions, looking another direction means it's using its' creative side, I forget which side is which, but this's readily used regularly in interrogating and questioning suspects for crimes.
This can be taken several steps farther with intense study and observation; in fact, there was an interesting show I saw awhile ago where they were putting magicians in a CAT scan because they understood aspects of how the brain worked that had previously not even been known to science.
For example; if yeu make a horizontal motion, like a wide arc, yeur brain does NOT actually follow the hand making the motion, yeur eyes will jerk repeatedly to different stages along the way, and anything that happens in between does not actually exist to yeu, only the starting and end points, meaning yeu can hide an action in the middle of a sideways arcing motion, such as moving yeur hand from one side of yeur body to the other, and the brain won't recognize anything that happened in the middle, it just fills in the gaps with assumptions.
Our brains are amazing computers, but they don't really process things like a TRUE computer... a true computer has to figure out every single thing 100% accurately and correct. The brain ditches 90% of the information and plays fill in the blanks afterwards if it's decided it needs that information that got ditched. This allows it to handle immense quantities of information quickly, such as sight, sound, and so on, but it ends up leaving out alot of stuff in the process.
A clear understanding of how the brain processes such information is required for 'psychics', for animation, for street magic, and so on. Everything is based off of making use of the sections of the brain that fail to properly process certain types of information, or process it in a particular way.
So, too, shows where most 'psychic' stuff comes from. The vast, vast, vast majority of it is not supernatural in any way shape or form, by our own standards. It's merely being capable of reading the other person's 'tells' with a high degree of accuracy.
How do you explain EVPs, electronic voice phenomena? If we use purely logic here, it makes no sense. How can you take a tape recorder into an empty room, ask a couple questions, play back the tape and hear someone answering the questions you asked?
Can someone explain that to me using logic?
They recently made a machine for use in interrogations which works in a very interesting way; it can literally read yeur mind.
Not by normal brain reading means, but by subvocalizations.
Any time yeu THINK of anything... such as an inner monologue, yeu actually are physically saying each and every word, but it's waaaaaay lower than even a whisper, just the mere thought of saying such causes yeur brain to automatically adjust yeur vocal chords to the correct position, but yeu aren't breathing any differently so it doesn't make any real sound difference; try whistling, then do so again when breathing normally... there's a very very very subtle difference in how yeu breathe without yeur lips pursed, not enough to create a true whistling sound, but it definitely changes the sound compared to just regular breathing without lips pursed.
Furthermore, we have the issue of seeing faces in clouds; yeur brain is designed to see patterns that don't exist. There's obviously no faces in the clouds, but we still go OOH THAT ONE'S A COW! =D
Put these togeather, and yeu find that most of these "EVP" are actually not really there at all. The majority of them have to be amplified to an immensely strong level, which's likely just someone subvocalizing such, which can severely distort one's voice in the process. Another issue is listening to static over and over and over with the intent of hearing something in it... yeu have to keep in mind that these "EVP" sessions often last for HOURS on end, and they'll be asking hundreds of questions, and get maybe 1 response the whole time, which is scratchy and doesn't sound like much of anything unless yeu're actively looking for it with a clear idea of whot yeu WANT it to sound like from the start.
I'd almost be willing to guarantee yeu that if yeu merely shoved a microphone in virtually any home and left it on overnight when noone was home, yeu'd get SOMETHING eventually which would qualify as EVP.
This doesn't mean that 100% of EVP cases are false, but like anything with ghosts, the vast majority of all evidence pointing towards them can be dismissed.
Nice video, though I found only the first half to be all that descent, after that he kind of rambles and wanders off, don't think he really has thought the rest of it through all that much.
Originally Posted by Victor View Post
We speak Shakespearean English
Actually, this's true. Shakesperean is classified as modern english; the fact that it has the same sentance structure and directly correlated wording makes it so. We can understand it without needing to learn an entirely different language.
Middle english was half french, and didn't have nearly the same descriptive words that english now possesses.
Old english (true old english, not the 'ye olde englishe' crap) can't be really understood anymore, and its' grammer was seriously whacked. Prefixes and suffixes played an immense role, for example, yeu could say the priest went to see the bishop, and the order of the words meant absolutely NIL. The prefixes and suffixes stated which was the primary and which was the secondary subject, rather than the order they were listed in, and so on. Well, unless yeu were asking a question, then word order was the only thing used to determine a question from a normal statement; there was no "?". I've heard and read actual old english in class, it's nothing even remotely similar to whot shakespear used.
Went to wikipedia to grab some examples for why shakespear is considered "modern" english XD
gomban gyldan. Þæt wæs god cyning!
ofer hronrade hyran scolde,
Hwæt! wē Gār-Dena in geār-dagum,
As yeu can see, these don't look anything like shakespearian english. That's whot "true" old english looks like.
Whan that Aueryłł wt his shoures soote,
Hath in the Ram, his half cours yronne;
That hem hath holpen whan þt they weere seeke.
Are examples of middle english; yeu can see it's starting to look at least vaguely similar to english but still doesn't make alot of sense in most cases.
So yes, we speak shakesperian english; both are considered to be modern english.
Scientists love not knowing.
I'm afraid I disagree, rather, scientists are COMFORTABLE with not knowing, but PREFER to know.
They seek out knowledge; if they loved not knowing they wouldn't bother to learn anything. Rather, they are not afraid of the unknown.
The lack of knowledge of whot comes after death leads many people to fear and terror, panic to the point they can't deal with their daily lives. Religion always has one aspect in common with it; it explains whot happens after yeu die, despite that this is unknowable. This "knowledge" allows for people to return to their lives, comforted in the fact that they know whot will happen.
People are generally afraid of whot they don't know. Yeu can either live in fear, or try to find out whot it is yeu don't know. Scientists are the latter. They don't enjoy not knowing, they just accept the fact that they don't know, and then try to DO something about that fact.