From: Nick 10/07/00 16:20:30
Subject: Imagination and perception post id: 96940
I was wondering whether our ability to imagine things was restricted to physically based objects / ideas.

So...

Can anyone imagine a colour that is not in the spectrum?
Can anyone imagine something with 4 (or more) dimensions? (Space dimensions, don't include time!)
Can anyone imagine anything else which is impossible to describe in the physical world?

Also:
Why are humans restricted to seeing light that has wavelength 400 - 700 nm. Do some people have a bigger or smaller range than others? Can some animals see a larger range of light than us? What colours would they see? Do the colours repeat themselves, ie blue, purple, violet, to red, orange, etc?

Finally, what range of frequencies of radiant heat are we sensitive to? Is the next lowest band, after infra red, heat, or is there something in between?


Cheers
Nick
From: Halogen Fisk ® 10/07/00 16:34:08
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96944
Can anyone imagine anything else which is impossible to describe in the physical world?


according to Taoists.. Yes! (& no!!)
From: Wendy 10/07/00 16:34:19
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96946


Can anyone imagine a colour that is not in the spectrum? Burple:)
Can anyone imagine something with 4 (or more) dimensions?
(Space dimensions, don't include time!) lust::)
Can anyone imagine anything else which is impossible to
describe in the physical world? those escher drawing thing-me-jings
From: Halogen Fisk ® 10/07/00 16:39:06
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96947
Can anyone imagine anything else which is impossible to describe in the physical world?


according to Taoists.. Yes! (& no!!)
From: Nick 10/07/00 16:47:09
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96953
I thought someone might mention Escher...
From: Becky 10/07/00 17:04:55
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96966
how about a bottomless lake, one that has no bottom and is really deep.
From: CJW 10/07/00 17:27:43
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96976
I thought it was the Zen(?) Buddhists who invented a special language to describe colour which they had seen during meditations.
From: Becky 10/07/00 17:33:01
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96979
Thinking about sciency things, I think the inside of a black hole is another one.



From: Chris (Avatar) 10/07/00 17:45:38
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96986

grrrrr...

(*soft, low, throaty growl*)

From: Carmel ® 10/07/00 18:03:29
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 96996

Why are humans restricted to seeing light that has wavelength 400 - 700
nm.

The question you are really asking is what colour is an orange in the dark.

In all seriousness, it is that these are the wavelengths that the cells in the back of our eyes are receptive to... I can't remember the details, but someone else here is sure to. Essentially, the cells in the back of our eyes are receptive only to light that falls into these wavelengths. Hence these are the wavelengths we see.

Can some animals see a larger range of light than us? What colours would
they see?

Yes. Bees for example see ultraviolet. I don't know if they see a large range than us or not, though.
From: DV (Avatar) 10/07/00 18:52:14
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97016
What an interesting det of questions.

Can anyone imagine a colour that is not in the spectrum?

Don't know about anyone else, but I can't. I can consider the idea, theorise etc, but if you mean, can I picture it in my mind's eye, then the answer is no.
(I presume by "in the spectrum" you mean in the normal set of colours and shades. Only the "saturated" colours are found in the actual spectrum. Ever seen brown in a rainbow?)

Can anyone imagine something with 4 (or more) dimensions? (Space dimensions, don't include time!)
Yyyyyyesssssss...to an extent.

Can anyone imagine anything else which is impossible to describe in the physical world?
Yes, but I'm afraid I can't describe it to you. ;^)

Why are humans restricted to seeing light that has wavelength 400 - 700 nm.
Briefly: the wavelength range to which a particular optic element is sensitive is determined by the structure of the protein attached to the opsin.

Do some people have a bigger or smaller range than others?
Since some people have some kind of colour blindness, I'd say yes, but don't quote me.

Can some animals see a larger range of light than us?
Yes.
Furthermore, there are some birds that have four primary colours. This means they effectively have an extra "dimension" of colour. Such birds are called tetrachromats. (Humans are trichromats).

What colours would they see?
Naturally, we have no words for the colours in question, but we could denote them by describing the frequency range and/or combinations.


Do the colours repeat themselves, ie blue, purple, violet, to red, orange, etc?

Not sure what you mean, but I'll say no anyway.


Finally, what range of frequencies of radiant heat are we sensitive to? Is the next lowest band, after infra red, heat, or is there something in between?
It's not cut and dried. If I shine a powerful enough ray of visible light at you, it will heat you up. Same with radio waves.
The range of e/m radiation that is most efficient for transfering heat to people seems to be centred on about 8 microns to 12 microns, from what I can gather. This is still called "infrared".


I was wondering whether our ability to imagine things was restricted to physically based objects / ideas.
Certainly heavily influenced by them, but not restricted to. I can imagine love, irony etc.


From: James Richmond (Avatar) 10/07/00 18:55:30
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97020
Interestingly, there is a very good evolutionary reason for seeing colours in the range from 400 to 700 nm. Guess which frequency range most of the light from our sun falls into...

JR


From: DV (Avatar) 10/07/00 19:01:12
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97024
Don't make us wait, JR. Tell us!
From: Schmuck 10/07/00 21:59:04
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97067
regarding the four or more dimensions, physicists invented an extra six dimensions in addition to space and time.
From: Kelvin ® 10/07/00 23:50:16
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97081
Hi There

it would seem to me that the biggest problem in descibing something that is new and imagined is one of nameclature. To describe your imaginery colour you would need to to either use a Munsell colour code or a description like reddy greeny blue with a touch of puce.

To describe your shape you would rrefer to sorta like a cube with a pointy bit out the top. Ther is no point in inventing brand new concepts eg my new colour is called ziggywolt without reference to the familiar or known.

Kelvin Fox
From: Choc 11/07/00 11:11:40
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97118
1. Octarine
2. Tesseract
3. That feeling you get in the back of your brain when you finish the third stubbie.
From: Choc 11/07/00 11:17:52
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97120
Humans may see light with a wavelength of 400 to 700 nm but we see best in the green part of the spectrum because that is the colour of the light in a rainforest when you are chasing after a wild pig, armed with nought but a pointy stick and the best organised brain on the planet.
From: DarrenK ® 11/07/00 11:26:13
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97122
My father had a friend who apparently* could see infra red somehow. The story is that he could see the IR beams in shop security devices and step over/under them very accurately. It may all be bollocks, but it makes a good story (imagine the face of the shopkeeper demonstrating his new, state-of-the-art IR net, which is promptly thwarted by the IR-mutant-guy)

*by apparently, I mean that I'd be more likely to trust information from the Womans' Weekly before I'd trust this story :)
From: DarrenK ® 11/07/00 11:33:14
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97127
"....colour of the light in a rainforest when you are chasing after a wild pig, armed with nought but a pointy stick and the best organised brain on the planet"

Of course, when that well organised brain allows you to furnish yourself with an automatic rifle with a telescopic night scope, the range of your visible spectrum becomes much less important! :)
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 11:41:41
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97133
As too might the point of hunting the (undoubtedly) worm-ridden pig. :)

Dusty
From: Robert ® 11/07/00 12:18:27
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97152
Hmm... would it be fair to say that for something to exist in the universe, that it must be perceivable in some way (including indirect methods and observation of consequences)?
From: DV (Avatar) 11/07/00 12:31:08
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97159
I would say that if something has no way of having any effect on us, then it is effectively outside our universe.

Of course, something can have an effect on us, without us realising that the effect was related to that thing, or even that the thing exists. Such things would still be part of our universe, but we might never know of them.
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 12:42:06
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97164
So whats the difference between somthing that cannot possibly have any effect on us and something that doesn't exist?

And what about things that don't exist that *do* have an effect on us?

Dusty
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 12:46:51
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97166
And what about things that don't exist that *do* have an effect on us?



How can something that doesn't exist, possibly have an effect on us Dusty. Give me some examples please.

Scooter
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 12:51:55
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97170
Have three:

Naria. Middle Earth. Paradise

Dusty
From: DV (Avatar) 11/07/00 12:52:53
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97171
Dusty: I guess for any practical purpose there is no difference. However, there is a difference between something we can never know about (but may affect us), and something that doesn't exist
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 12:53:06
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97172
Sorry, it's Narnia, isn't it?

Dusty
From: Carmel ® 11/07/00 12:53:56
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97173
In my entirely enlightened opinion;

If it exists, it is in some way exerting an effect, somewhere in the universe (not always within our scope of perception though - for example, we could not alway perceive blackholes, yet they still existed). Conversely, in order for something to exist, it must exert and effect, somewhere.

I don't know... I'm bored, my brain is addled and I am wathcing the _funniest_ safety video you have ever seen...
From: Choc 11/07/00 12:55:07
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97174
Something that does not exist but does have an effect on us.

A cat that is inside a closed box with a bowl of poisoned milk.

Bam! Bam! End Of Thread. No Need for Any Futher Comments. hahahahaha.


From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 12:55:41
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97175
Dusty: I guess for any practical purpose there is no difference.

Practical or otherwise, I would have thought.

However, there is a difference between something we can never know about (but may affect us), and something that doesn't exist

Agreed.

Dusty

From: Purple ® 11/07/00 12:57:46
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97177
A cat that is inside a closed box with a bowl of poisoned milk.
How can you say that this doesn't exist?
And btw I don't much care for cruelty to cats - I find it very offensive.
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 12:58:07
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97178
I'm really worried Dusty that you are serious with your examples. How can Narnia possibly affect us????

Scooter
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 12:59:17
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97180
In my entirely enlightened opinion;

Its ahrd to be humble when you so good...

If it exists, it is in some way exerting an effect, somewhere in the universe (not always within our scope of perception though - for example, we could not alway perceive blackholes, yet they still existed).

Agreed.

Conversely, in order for something to exist, it must exert and effect, somewhere.

Up for debate. Which was my point entirely.

I don't know... I'm bored, my brain is addled and I am wathcing the _funniest_ safety video you have ever seen...

"Please do not insert you workmates finger into the high voltage power socket"

Dusty

From: Purple ® 11/07/00 12:59:58
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97181
Stay out of the wardrobe Scooter and you won't have to worry about it.....
From: Carmel ® 11/07/00 13:00:30
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97183
Narnia. Middle Earth. Paradise

I don't know... Okay... all hold their breath while Carmel walks out on a limb

If it is somehow exerts and effect, be it to gives us hope or otherwise, then it exists. That is not to say you can go out and visit Middle Earth for you summer vaccation, but, that it exists. You know the cliched image: 'it exists within your soul & etc'

Not tangible... but exists. Not even real, but existing.
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:02:13
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97184
I'm dead serious Scooter. You ever read something fictional and then go act it out (as a kid or otherwise)? Ever play a role-playing game. Ever feel an emotional attachment to a TV character who then dies. Do I relly need to go on?

Dusty
From: DV (Avatar) 11/07/00 13:02:43
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97185
Narnia can affect us on a certain level, and on that level, it exists. It is an idea, which is a kind fo cerebral event, but it certainly really happens.
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:03:18
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97186
Huh Carmel?
it's al a bit much for me...
From: Carmel ® 11/07/00 13:04:14
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97188
Its ahrd to be humble when you so good...

It's all a matter of perception ;)

(I hope you all realise I was being sarcastic...)
From: DV (Avatar) 11/07/00 13:04:48
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97189
"Do you like Turkish Delight, little boy?"

-"Not really. You got any kebabs?"

(The Young Ones)
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:05:48
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97191
Stay out of the wardrobe Scooter and you won't have to worry about it.....


Dare I say I came out of the wardrobe years ago.

No I am not gay. It was a joke

Scooter
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:06:06
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97192
Hey hey! I've thought of something - Has anyone else done this? I dreamed that my husband was having an affair and for the next few days I was so shitty with him it wasn't funny.
I think this is imagination affecting my reality.
From: Carmel ® 11/07/00 13:07:58
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97193
Um, okay, probably went a little abstract there...

Okay... basically, what I was trying to say was that if you beleive in something (an ideal, Utopia for example, or magic even) then it has a neffect on you. And because it exerts an effect on you, it exists. Even if it is only within your own mind. As long you beleive, as long as you are affected by that beleif, it exists!


From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:08:22
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97194
Do I relly need to go on?

No not really, I get the point.

Scooter
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:09:19
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97195
Narnia can affect us on a certain level, and on that level, it exists. It is an idea, which is a kind fo cerebral event, but it certainly really happens.

Yeah, but Narnia is not that thought process, nor (if you undecided about the mind-body question) is it that cerebral event. Besides which it exists outside of that cerebral event, on pages and in other peoples heads(minds). And equally it can be argued that its not those minds event, nor the pages of the book(s). So it doesn't exist.

Or you broaden your definition for existence and introduce all sorts of wonderful problems (not isoluble ones, however).

Dusty
(who only just realised that boring housewife is wearing Purple (or is it the other way around)

"It was like he was wearing an Edgar suit" - MIB
From: Chris (Avatar) 11/07/00 13:10:57
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97197

A cat that is inside a closed box with a bowl of poisoned milk.
How can you say that this doesn't exist?

Choc was alluding to the "schroedinger's cat" thought experiment, demonstrating quantum probability and wavefunction superposition (there are some good explanations in the FAQ). Unfortunately he's missed the point, being that the cat can't affect the universe until observed - at which point either a dead or live cat is hauled into very real existence*.

(hauled into existence... depending on your interpretation)

And btw I don't much care for cruelty to cats - I find it very offensive.

Don't worry Purple... being a thought experiment no cats are harmed in any way in its performance. :o) In fact my kitten is named after this experiment (Schrodie for short). Big boots to fill indeed.

Chris

From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:11:07
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97198
And after reading my last few posts, I think a typing tutor is in order. :)

Dusty
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:11:17
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97199
who only just realised that boring housewife is wearing Purple
Damn! Blown my cover again *lol*
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:12:06
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97201
Using the arguments put forward by Carmel and Dusty, would it be fair to say that in reality nothing is non-existent?

If I can imagine something and I am really moved by that imagining, it has effected me and therefore exists.

Scooter
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:13:42
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97202
I think the secret was well out, I'm just a little slow on the uptake sometimes :)

Dusty the Feeble
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:14:22
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97203
schroedinger's cat - never heard of it.... more research......
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:14:51
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97204
and if a tree fell in the forest.......
From: Carmel ® 11/07/00 13:15:10
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97205
Um, I guess so.

Which brings forth a whole world of enlightening possibilities.
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:15:50
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97207
And you may end up in a upholstered room, also very real, of no-one imagining. :)

But it makes you wonder about people telling you to get real and then going to watch Ally McBeal :)

Dusty
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:15:56
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97208
It was blown really fast Dusty *lol*...you see "I can lift heavy fings".
I really thought I could remain incognito.....
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:19:44
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97210
k
      is there anything worse than not knowing?

knowing that things are bad is awful, but only as awful as the bad thing itself.   believing that things are bad, but not being sure, not KNOWing is simply unbearable because then you are dealing with all of the worst case scenarios all at once, without any sort of closure or steadiness and WITH the terrible little occasional ray of hope to keep you from resigning yourself to what is most likely inevitable.  in some situations the worst possible outcome is not as bad as simply not knowing the outcome.

      i want to be able see it coming.

      my imagination is far too overactive to be able to deal with some sorts of ambiguity.  i play things out too many times, too many ways.   at times i cannot be trusted with my own thoughts.

.

I found this while searching for schroedingers cat.
Hmm...very deep - maybe I don't need to know after all.
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:20:45
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97211
I really thought I could remain incognito..

cue bad joke:

"But once you're in the cognito, how do you get out again."

IP address are a bitch, ain't they :)

Is boring housewife registered also?

And before this arguements dies a death, I was actually trying to make quite the opposite point to Carmel, I think things don't have to exist to have an effect on us. So, while you may imagine something and be moved by it and act on that emotion, the thing which moved you doesn't still exist.

Dusty
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:22:42
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97212
And this...obviously this experiment is not taken seriously.....I'm learning

SCHRÖDINGER'S CAT
(or, a tail of two kitties)
Contributed by Jon McKay
This refers to a famous experiment in probability.

A box is rigged thus: A poison gas canister is attached to the box. The trigger for the gas is set up with a small sample of radioactive material so that in a given time, the chance is exactly ½ that the gas will be released1.

Take 1 large annoyed cat. Attempt to place it in the box. Call an ambulance and have the severe lacerations on your arms and head seen to. Take 1 placid cute kitten. Drop it in the box. Much easier!

Wait for the given length of time. The paradox now formed is this: The cat is now definitely either alive or dead. But is it one or the other? Even though the event, if it happened, has by now taken place, is the probability of one or the other result still 50%?

Think about this carefully.

Now go and have a good lie down.

It is useful to note that the Schrodinger's cat experiment has only been carried out under full test conditions at the Maximegalon Institute for Extreme Cleverness, but due to an improbability party in the next room, the results were:

Two cats died2 of gas (or at least extreme indigestion).
One cat developed a hammer drill attachment and tunneled its way out of the box.
One cat was eaten by the box, which then asked for the dessert menu before retiring to a corner of the room and muttering about how these places were not as good as they used to be.
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:23:54
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97213
I found it very sad. I think it says more about the writer than it does illuminate some universal truth.

Dusty, who finds *sometimes* it fun to let go and see what happens.
From: boring housewife ® 11/07/00 13:24:30
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97214
Yes
From: Choc 11/07/00 13:25:34
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97215
I thought the point of schrodie the cat was that:

The Box EXISTS!
The Cat EXISTS!
The Poisoned Milk EXISTS!
The Saucer EXISTS!

but
The velocity of the cat cannot be known if you know where the pussy is!

and

If you know how fast the pussy is then you can never find it!
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:30:21
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97216
Hi all.
From: Choc 11/07/00 13:31:39
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97217
Allalu Akbar!
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:32:18
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97218
"Dude, did you just hear the voice of god?"

"No, man, that was Charlton Heston with a megaphone."

Dusty
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:33:14
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97219
Ohayo gosaimasu, o genki desu ka
From: Choc 11/07/00 13:33:32
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97220
sorry,

Allahlu Akbar?
From: Chris (Avatar) 11/07/00 13:34:29
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97221

Um, well, one obvious answer here is...

god.

We can't prove God exists, or that God doesn't exist. But we can sure imagine her/him/it, and that imagining will affect the way people live their life. Some people have argued that because their lives are affected by their belief in God that this is proof he/she/it exists. From a perspective of science, logic or reason such an argument doesn't follow. This is because there are other possible explanations for the affect on their life (for example I submit that it is empirically impossible to tell the difference between the effect that the existence of god might have on a person's life, and the effect of their belief in god).

Interestingly in my experience belief in God opens the door to a multitude of other things one can imagine which might very well not exist (for example how God might resolve the puzzle of how to squeeze millions of fundamentalist christians into the 144000 places the book of revelations says are reserved in heaven - trying discussing that one with a door-to-door religion salesperson!)

That's the big one as far as I can see. There are an infinite number of trivially similar examples, eg I can imagine having a brother (I don't have a brother). I can certainly imagine santa claus, and spent some years doing so. I'm fond of imagining Magic Chickens, although I use them expressly for the purpose of demonstrating how they may be considered superfluous to existence.

In science I can imagine alternate dimensional space (although I can't interact with it by definition). I can imagine separate universes (although again I can't interact with them by definition). I've seen people who are quite capable of imagining we live in a steady state universe, or that time dilation doesn't happen, or that twirling superconducting ceramic discs are antigravity devices. Many people have imagined perpetual motion machines, accelerating a massive body uniformly to light speed and extracting usable energy from the quantum vacuum ZPE.

I've imagined backward time machines and they may yet be proven impossible (or not - who knows?). I've watched the movies "the invisible man" and "the nutty professor" (the original jerry louis one). They don't exist.

If we couldn't imagine what isn't there we wouldn't progress, I guess. As Albert E once said "imagination is more important than knowledge".

My 2c (GST exemption number #34-989-0001).
Chris

From: god ® 11/07/00 13:34:52
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97222
RAOFLMAO @ Dusty
From: Choc 11/07/00 13:35:37
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97223
Klatu Verrada Nikto?
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:38:31
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97224
Um, well, one obvious answer here is...

god.

See, I knew I dropped by for a reason. However I refuse to prove that I exist, because proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.

Now prove white is black. Go on. But watch out for zebras and pedestrian crossings ;->
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:38:44
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97225
Sorry, choc, I don't speak Klingon. :)

Dusty
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:39:53
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97226
Klatu Verrada Nikto?

Sorry doesn't work on me.
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:41:04
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97227
Sorry, choc, I don't speak Klingon. :)

Wasn't klingon

From: James Richmond (Avatar) 11/07/00 13:41:44
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97228
Can anyone imagine a colour that is not in the spectrum?

If by "spectrum" you mean "the whole range of visible colours", then by definition it is impossible to imagine a colour which is not in the spectrum. If it's not in the spectrum, then logically it isn't a colour.

Can anyone imagine something with 4 (or more) dimensions? (Space dimensions, don't include time!)

Yes - mathematicians and physicists do this all the time. Such dimensions can only be described by analogy or by projecting them onto "ordinary" 3D space. Nevertheless, when people work with higher dimensions, they have some concept of the higher dimensional space as a whole, along with various pictures of what it looks like in projection. There are many, many ideas in science which are abstractions or models of processes which "really" happen. For example, we all have an idea of what an atom looks like, but how closely does our picture mimic the weird "reality"?

Can anyone imagine anything else which is impossible to describe in the physical world?

It is easy to imagine things which couldn't happen in the physical world - every type of magic qualifies as an example. However, I don't think it is possible to imagine something which is impossible to describe. We can always resort to analogy if necessary to describe something (though this might not capture its nature exactly).

JR

From: Choc 11/07/00 13:44:02
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97229
Today is a Good Day To Die

----------Klingon.
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:44:15
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97230
I see Carmel the Caramel Camel has departed.
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:45:01
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97231
Didn't inventions start off in someones imagination?
I think there is nothing left to invent, but I'm sure someone else thought this 50 years ago and look how far we've come since then.
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:48:08
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97232
Today is a Good Day To Die

----------Klingon.

I beg to differ choc. That was a line used in Evil Dead to make it possible for the good guy to pick up the "Book Of The Dead", if he stuffed it up (which he did) all hell would break loose (which it did).

Scooter

ps. I notice God dropped by whilst I was at lunch. Gees go away for 15 minutes and look what happens. Sheeesh



From: Choc 11/07/00 13:49:38
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97233
The supreme aliterator.

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

What does a cold carton of carleton cold cost?
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:50:28
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97234
Today is a Good Day To Die
----------Klingon.

Pinched from a Native American tribe/clan I believe. I don't know which one, but I'd imagine they were fairly warlike, its a pre-battle mantra after all.

Dusty

From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:51:25
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97235
I think there is nothing left to invent

AARRGGGHHHHH Blasphemy!!!! As long there is imagination, there will always be something to invent.

Scooter
From: Purple ® 11/07/00 13:52:29
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97236
My point exactly Scooter....
From: god ® 11/07/00 13:53:10
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97237
The supreme aliterator.

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

What does a cold carton of carleton cold cost?

Sorry Choc, but are you asking me these questions?
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:53:41
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97238
AARRGGGHHHHH Blasphemy!!!! As long there is imagination, there will always be something to invent.

And as long as there are dudes with pony tails drinking bad alcoholic drinks, they'll be someone to sell it to you. :)

Dusty
From: Choc 11/07/00 13:54:42
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97239
no scooter you misunderstood.
I wasn't saying klatu verrada nikto was klingon.
I was quoting Worf Who Is A Klingon.

Klatu Verrada Nikto is from The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Evil Dead Three ripped it off.

Heh but it gave me a laugh.


From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:55:13
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97240
Sorry Purple, I will soon learn to read the whole post not just skim it.

Scooter

From: DV (Avatar) 11/07/00 13:56:28
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97241
Looking down on empty streets, all she can see
are the dreams all made solid, are the dreams all made real.
All of the buildings, all of those cars, were once just a dream in somebody's head.
She pictures the broken glass, she pictures the steam
She pictures a soul with no leak at the seam.

Let's take the boat out, wait until darkness
let's take the boat out, wait until darkness comes.

Nowhere in the corridors of pale green and grey.
Nowhere in the suburbs in the cold light of day.
There in the midst of it so alive and alone
words support like bone.

Chorus:
Dreaming of Mercy St.
Wear your inside out.
Dreaming of mercy
in your daddy's arms again.
Dreaming of Mercy St.
Swear they moved that sign.
Dreaming of mercy in your daddy's arms.

Pulling out the papers from the drawers that slide smooth.
Tugging at the darkness, word upon word.
Confessing all the secret things in the warm velvet box.
To the priest-he's the doctor.
He can handle the shocks.
Dreaming of the tenderness-the tremble in the hips
of kissing Mary's lips.

Repeat Chorus

Anne, with her father is out in the boat
riding the water
riding the waves on the sea
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 13:57:46
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97242
How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

What does a cold carton of carleton cold cost?

A cold carton of Carlton cold costs as close to cost as costs can contain, clearly cooling the carton of cold costs considerable cash.

Supreme alliterator my arse :)

Dusty
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 13:57:51
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97243
Ah, yes Choc I did misunderstand, sorry. And even though The Day The Earth Stood Still is one of my fav movies, I forgot that's where it was from oringinally.

Scooter

From: Choc 11/07/00 13:59:51
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97244
Scooter,

You Grok me. Let us Share Water.

From: god ® 11/07/00 14:01:27
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97245
Might I just say WOW Dusty, hadn't heard that last one, must be because I don't drink anymore. (none to obvious hint to my true identity)
From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 14:02:00
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97246
Choc, you are the base of the pillar.

Dusty
From: Scooter ® 11/07/00 14:02:58
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97247
Umm, Ok Choc, lets.

Scooter

From: Dusty ® 11/07/00 14:04:04
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97249
Might I just say WOW Dusty, hadn't heard that last one, must be because I don't drink anymore.

Nah, I just made it up :)

(none to obvious hint to my true identity)

Not at all :)

Dusty

From: Choc 11/07/00 14:04:52
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97250
Dusty: 170,000,980,555,234

god(the supreme alliterator):zip, nada, zilch, nothing.
From: Choc 11/07/00 14:09:51
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97251
"Choc, you are the base of the pillar."

sorry dusty I missed the reference is that from stranger in a strange land too?

anyway

Dusty, you are the Key to the arch.

From: god ® 11/07/00 14:14:40
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97254
Get a room you two.
From: CJW 11/07/00 15:20:28
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97293
Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam
Sujatlh 'e' yImev


From: Nick 11/07/00 15:27:43
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97298
Thanks for the discussion, I've been reading it...

JR What I meant was:
Try and imagine what ultra-violet would look like if you could see that range of colours / frequencies (like those birds).

Also, it would be quicker for me to read if people chatted in a different thread.

Cheers
Nick
From: Robert 11/07/00 20:53:59
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97387
Thanks for the responses today :-)

A couple of points, though:

Re: the outside world---
Of course, something can have an effect on us, without us realising that the effect was related to that thing, or even that the thing exists. Such things would still be
part of our universe, but we might never know of them
(not always within our scope of perception though - for example, we could not alway perceive blackholes, yet they still existed)

The important thing IMHO is not whether we actually perceived or noticed the cause, but whether is was possible to perceive or eventually notice the cause.

It seems it is agreed that for something to exist in the outside word (as opposed to imagination), it needs to have some effect in some part of the Universe at some time, hence be observable, hence be perceiveable (except maybe at the quantum level - this isn't the same trap Einstein fell into with the EPR experiment was it?)

Re:Imagination

If you can think of something, does that necessarily imply it exists? In one sense, it exists as electrical activity in your head, in another, as a spooky abstract mind thing. Sure, you can think of invisible dragons, god(s), magic chickens etc. but does this imply that they exist? In my opinion - no. Romanticists cry foul - what about love, they say, what about the effects of these abstract things floating in our imagination - surely the effects imply existence?

But why should the effects imply existence of the abstract thing? If I refuse to get in my car because I think there is a bomb, surely it doesn't exist despite the effects it is having on me? I can't detect, detonate, defuse, touch, eat, smell, see (bar hallucination) this bomb, nor can anyone nor anything else.

The obvious work-around is to say that these things exist only in the imagination, but not in the outside world. But to shorten that sentence to just, "It exists" is dangerous. Why? Because then you have a whole bunch of things jumping the boat into the outside world just because they can be thought of. Why is thought so special, anyway? Why leave a special door for existence there when it is really just a thing possesed by animals with brains on a little blue planet somewhere in the Milky Way Galaxy? Seems a little anthropocentric to me (I hope that is the right word).

Surely, all that we think, our imagination, is just a function of what happens in our brains anyway (our neurones are part of the outside world, anyway).

Should not reality be absolute? Why should this keyboard attached to my fingers and I be in separate Universes just because it lacks imagination? Why should each animal (with a brain) get their own unique reality at birth which is then taken away at brain death? Surely, it is more probable that there is only one Universe, one reality, and that our brains are just (fallible) tools for observing it?

And now we move to the big grandaddy of them all - god. I am prepared to accept that God(s) can exist in people's imaginations, but as is mentioned above, this is strictly only as an abstract representation of what is really a consequence of activity in the natural world - a sort of pseudoexistence. So what is wrong with this reasoning:

God cannot shown to exist (or be non-existent)
So God cannot influence the outside world (or it would be easy to show existence)
But for something to exist in the outside world, it must influence it somehow
So God cannot exist in the outside world.
So God may perhaps exist somewhere other than the outside world - like imagination
But this would mean that everything exists - an absurd statement! (or at least a bad definition of existence)
So God can't exist.
But this is contrary to the first premise - unfalsifiability has implied fallacy here
So the statement, "X cannot be shown to exist, nor be shown to be non-existent" is a contradiction
Since it is contradictory, it must not exist since such contradictions cannot occur in reality - reality is consistent. For example, an irresistable force can never meet an immovable object in reality, for if one existed, the other couldn't.

Thank you if you made it this far :-)
From: AstRoboY ® 11/07/00 22:37:25
Subject: re: Imagination and perception post id: 97447
Re Chris,

I think you have summed this up very well. Everything stems from our imagination which in turn derives from our unique awareness/consciousnes and should be nurtured correctly from childhood. As far as god goes, even if we're atheistic, It would be interesting/fun to see what SSSfers imaginings of him/her/it/them.. would be.
I like to go the microcosm route and imagine something like; Take all of human kinds knowledge to date; multiply this by at least 1,000,000 trillion times and go looking way down deep into the sub atomic quantum world... not the macro.


regards
AstRoboYtext
This forum is un-moderated. The views and opinions expressed are those of the individual poster and not the ABC. The ABC reserves the right to remove offensive or inappropriate messages.