Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Apr 26 00:47:35 2019

Utopia Talk / Politics / Meteor explosion cuba
Sam Adams
Member
Fri Feb 01 17:02:25
Reports of the shockwave breaking windows at the surface. Initial videos make it look smaller than chelyabinsk.
Sam Adams
Member
Fri Feb 01 17:20:17
Based on forecast winds aloft and the satellite movement of the ash cloud, the meteor detonation over cuba was probably at around 20kft or above 60kft. I think 60+ is more likely.
Sam Adams
Member
Fri Feb 01 17:49:10
Some of the videos look pretty unimpressive compared with chelynabisk
Hrothgar
Member
Sun Feb 03 11:08:26
Wow! These events always are a solid grounding reminder that us humans are still utterly at the mercy of fate and and forces of nature around us.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Feb 03 13:34:52
Cosmic events always make me think of how small the universe is and how humans must never intellectually resign merely to be part of something "greater" — instead, to become a destiny; to destroy determinism, the fates, and all gods; to control the stars themselves; and to let reign the only power worth awe: that of the Great Satan who lives inside of the unconquerable Übermensch. Let the peasants stare, mouths agape, while Satan rises above the stars of "God"! Hail Satan!!
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Feb 03 17:15:58
I can still "grasp" 200 billion stars in the Milky way, but somewhere between the local group and the virgo super cluster I have no idea what the fuck all those numbers even mean. So by the time we get to the "Observable universe" my brain has check out.

And then they say, the actual size of the universe is atleast 10^23 (100 sextillion) times larger that the observable.

All I wanted was to watch People getting owned part 26.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 03 19:13:01
Nimi
heh, try not to get overwhelmed. Anything above 12 is an abstract anyway.

If you believe in the big bang theory, then the size of the universe is simply a measure of time.

If you have to be impressed, then be impressed by the mass of the universe :-).
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Feb 04 10:42:53
Jergul
Unfathomable, but I felt a bit better hearing an actual relevant for the topic scientist say ”not even scientist who work with this can really wrap their heads around numbers that huge, nobody can”.

Pretty much everything about the universe is overwhelming, shit even the things going on on this rock, in my own life can be overwhelming at times :)

hood
Member
Mon Feb 04 11:08:51
"even the things going on on this rock, in my own life can be overwhelming at times"

Nut up, buttercup.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Feb 04 11:17:57
"even the things going on on this rock, in my own life can be overwhelming at times"

They have an app now where you can text with a shrink anytime you feel anxiety, overwhelmed, etc. I'm guessing that app was pretty much made for you, so you might as well use it.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 04 12:39:17
We cannot wrap our heads numbers larger than 12.

Humans are pretty much 1 cognitive evolutionary step past "1, 2, many".

You might as well be overwhelmed the next time you pick up a couple dozen eggs.
hood
Member
Mon Feb 04 12:43:21
"We cannot wrap our heads numbers larger than 12."

You are a weak individual. Stop projecting upon others.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Feb 04 12:53:22
If life hasn't overwhelmed you, it is because you are a pussy who does not challenge yourself. To push the limits implies going over them and finding yourself in deep water. That is all that needs to be said about that.

Jergul
Not sure what you mean with that.
hood
Member
Mon Feb 04 13:30:13
"To push the limits implies going over them and finding yourself in deep water."

Finding yourself in deep water need not be overwhelming. But more importantly, it was a joke ya knob.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Feb 04 13:53:38
Then you are doing it wrong. But more importantly it kinda gets wierd of you are busting someone chops jokingly and when they do it back, you take it seriously.
hood
Member
Mon Feb 04 14:13:55
Did I respond in a way that implied I was adversely affected by you calling me a pussy? ;p
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Feb 04 15:49:49
Incidentally a tell tale sign I am fucking with someone is the use of the word "pussy". It has turned into a satirical word in my vocabulary. It is such a toxically masculine (ding ding) thing to say!
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Feb 04 16:12:34
"jergul
large member Mon Feb 04 12:39:17
We cannot wrap our heads numbers larger than 12. "

This needs to be saved for all time
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 04 21:29:53
Sammy
Try. Visualize distinct items. You will almost certainly fail at 6-8 and the items become many.

There is no conceptual difference between imagining 13 and imagining 13x10^145.

So yah, feel free to save this for all time.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 04 21:41:29
Hood
It is one of about 5 things that are good to know about the human condition.

1. We have a poor sense of self.
2. We have the attention span of gnats
3. We suck at delayed gratification
4. We don't get numbers.

Yepp. 5 things.
Nekran
Member
Mon Feb 04 22:10:58
"There is no conceptual difference between imagining 13 and imagining 13x10^145."

Yes there is. For the second one, "many" does not work at all and there is nothing that does.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 04 22:52:17
Nekran
No there is not. You cannot imagine either.

The 1-4 was a joke. 4 not being 5 you see. Alluding to our not getting numbers.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 04 23:02:10
I should have avoided the double entendre "cannot imagine either".

Nimi is correct that numbers beyond a certain point are essentially imaginary (belong to the realm of imagination as we could never grasp them tangibly in the real world).

My point is that the certain point is very low. In the 6-8 range with an upper limit of 12.

No point in finding the mass of the universe daunting (its size simply tells you how old the universe is).

2 dozen eggs are equally daunting.

McKobb
Member
Mon Feb 04 23:08:19
Meh... a singular mitosis is greater than all the celestial movements that created it.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 04 23:49:33
Mckobb
"greater"

Humans excel at qualitative stuff. It really is quite amazing how good we are with values.
McKobb
Member
Tue Feb 05 00:50:32
wurd!
Nekran
Member
Tue Feb 05 08:02:50
"Nekran
No there is not. You cannot imagine either."

I can easily imagine "many eggs" that are at least 13 of them though. In fact I can easily imagine a carton of 12 eggs with 1 more egg lying next to it... you could consider the carton cheating, but that's not the point.

The point is that no matter how massive an amount of eggs I imagine, it is never even nearly enough to be 13x10^145. My imagination is too limited.
jergul
large member
Tue Feb 05 08:07:17
Nekran
You would no longer be counting eggs, you would be counting a carton and an egg. So you would have counted to 2. Easily within your cognitive capabilities.

You can imagine many eggs. As can we all. Be it 13 or 13x10^145 of them.
Nekran
Member
Tue Feb 05 08:08:46
I think you vastly underestimate how massive an amount of eggs 13x10^145 eggs would be.
jergul
large member
Tue Feb 05 08:10:40
(I just imagined the moon consists entirely of eggs. Or perhaps Jupiter is. As easy to do as imagining 13 eggs)
Nekran
Member
Tue Feb 05 08:15:23
You think you can correctly imagine the size of jupiter or the moon?

Apart from that, that would be fewer eggs. Way fewer eggs.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Feb 05 09:46:48
Lol jergul maths. Jupiter? That many eggs would fill vastly more than the known universe.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Feb 05 09:53:18
Jergul
I get what you are saying, there is truth to this I think, but I think the number is 20. We have 10 fingers and 10 toes. They would count as ”distinct”? We can think in those terms.
hood
Member
Tue Feb 05 09:55:00
Indeed. About 10^80 atoms in the observable universe. The estimated size of the full universe is ~ 300x bigger? So 10^82 atoms. In the whole universe. Give or take a power or two.

^145...
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Feb 05 12:53:30
I think 100 is the first "large" number children learn. I tried this on my sister when we were kids. I think I was 8 and she was 3 years younger. I asked her how many of different things she thought there was, for instances pillows on the sofa, apples in the basket, plants in the window etc. While she could count it was all good and all the things were below 10. Dam it I need to beat her! So I asked her how many beans in this jar? lol I still remember this so clearly, she raised her hands above her head and said "that has to be a HUNDRED!"

I WON!
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Feb 05 13:03:08
and winning is half the battle
jergul
large member
Tue Feb 05 18:29:12
Sammy and Nekran
I pre-emptively checked out of curiosity. ^145 remains as cognitively comprehensible as 13.

As indicated by the ease of which the number of atoms in the universe was quantified.

Its just another number. Like say the number 13.

Nimi
The number is typically 6-8 and never higher than 12. We break it down into groups. Fingers and toes = 4 groups. Each of 5.

The decimal system is not hardwired.

We are much, much better with values. Which is the cause of the difficulty here. ^145 is unimaginably bigger than 13, so we cannot qualifying it.

Which vexes us and is a bit scary because we are so good at values.

But numbers are about quantity, not quality.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Feb 06 11:52:11
No it isn’t, but cognitive studies put the ”max” number of of social relations, ”what we evolved for” for at 150-200 people. Dinstict. But perhaps you means, imagining numbers of things in the abstract sense?
jergul
large member
Wed Feb 06 13:07:57
I mean that we cannot track more than 12 distinct items in our mind.

That is our hardwired limit. Anything above 12 is an abstraction and one abstraction is exactly as good as another. 13 eggs being an abstraction as good as 13x10^145 eggs.
Nekran
Member
Wed Feb 06 13:13:02
One number is still comprehensible though, while the other one is not. As you demonstrated well.
jergul
large member
Wed Feb 06 13:20:58
Comprehensible in sense that we feel comfortable qualifying it? Sure. 13 eggs is a bit more than I need to make a great omelette.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Feb 06 13:47:25
Ah ok, yes. I believe you are correct. Abstract concept like numerals are not inherent to our brains, we have to learn to think within this framework. But even when we do learn this system, there is a limit to how many things we can imagine of the same type and keep seperate. It probably varies from person to person, but intuitively 12 sounds like a reasonable upper limit.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Feb 06 13:55:14
I think this made a bit more difficult to think about because everyone here automatically falls into thinking about the actual number. Seven sheep, and you see the number 7 + sheep. Or you count 7 sheep 1 sheep at a time. Or you start cheating a bit, put 5 sheep in a pentagon with 1 sheep in the middle. Then repeat. But with the third pentagon they blend into 3 blobs.

The brain has some strange ways of dealing with the world.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed Feb 06 14:10:14
42
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Feb 06 14:13:35
It took the most powerful AI in the universe, 7.5 millions years to reach that answer.
TJ
Member
Wed Feb 06 14:20:29
99 bottles of beer on the wall.

Is that misleading imaginary? snicker
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share