Thoughts about René Descartes the man, who existed and thought

Thoughts about René Descartes the man, who existed and thought

René Descartes (1) (1596-1650) was one of the most interesting persons, who has ever lived in Europe. He created an idea, that existence means that creature could think independently, and independence of thinking is the same thing, what the independence in life would be. So when creature thinks, that means creature exists. This idea is culminating in modern Artificial intelligence. Are we creating the machine, what exists, or what knows that it existed? This is a very interesting question because stones also exist but they don't know their existence. Or how could I know, does the stone know it's existence? 

I can think that stone is so different creature, that we cannot even notice, it's alive. So for us, it's the creature, what is dead and that's it. The thing is that Descartes was one of the most interesting persons in the history culminates in his work as the teacher of the Queen of Sweden, Christina (1626-1689), who was protestant. Descartes was Catholic and that thing is really interesting because in that time the 30 Years War was just ended, and Catholics had very bad relationships with protestants. 

So how Descartes allowed teaching the had of protestants? The thing is that Descartes died year after he came to Stockholm, is causing many theories about the methods, what this man used in his work. And the thing is that Christina turned to Catholic, and abdicated her crown is remarkable. 

So did Descartes use some kind of suggestion to that 22 years old woman? Those things are really interesting to think, and when we are looking at the work, what Descartes made in the field of research of the anatomy or natural sciences, we must realize that there is something that people are not understood, and that thing is that if Descartes wrote something, that man might mean something else. 

This thing is visible in the image, which is found on the Finnish Wikipedia page about this man. There is an image (3), that demonstrates the cooperation with hand and eye, and there is another explanation for that image. The thing is that the image might also represent the statue, which keeps the book in the hand. And when the time is coming, the sunlight would be conducted to the series of lenses and mirrors to the eyes of the statue, and that thing causes a fire. 

The thing is that the system might use the very big parabolic mirror for conducting the light to a small channel, where is the series of lenses and mirrors. I don't know does this thing work, but if the parabolic mirror, what size is two meters would target to a statue or intaking lens hours in shiny day, that thing might have a very big effect. I don't know did Descartes finalized his ideas, but this kind of thing is very interesting. 

(1)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Descartes

(2)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christina,_Queen_of_Sweden

(3)

Descartes in Finnish

https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Descartes

Image:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Descartes_diagram.png/200px-Descartes_diagram.png

The mystery of sleep

The mystery of sleep

This writing is thinking about dreams and sleep. Are those things really "only" mean handling the problems, what we are facing every time? Or is there some other mean for this mystery, what we are facing day after day during our life. Sleep and dreams are an everyday thing, which has a big role in human life, and this is why it fascinates philosophers and scientists.

Why we need sleep is one of the most interesting questions in history, and somebody has explained that the simple answer would be that the level of certain neurotransmitters would get low. When we are thinking of sleep and dreams and its connection with hallucinations, some people have thought that when a person is awake, there is some hormone, that acts as a clock.

And when the level of that hormone is low, the person must go to sleep, and sleep is like loading the batteries or storages of that hormone, but the thing that is called dreams is not a thing, which can be explained in that way. The thing is that dreams have been explained as the situation or condition, where human would use entire brain capacity, what is released because the memory and senses are not operating during dreams.

 One of the best arguments of those people claims is the founding of the form of the benzene molecule, and we know that after a traumatic situation like fight person would go home and sleep, and the reason for that would be that brains would analyze things, what is happening during the day. And that would be a very good explanation for dreams. The dreams could simply release all the brain capacity for making the solutions for problems. But there are many other explanations.

One is that when people are awake, the loaded storage of the neurotransmitters would decrease, and the person would slip to the sleep. That thing could explain the hallucination. In that theory in the human body are two types of neurotransmitters, the neurotransmitters what would use in the daytime or when a person is awake, and the neurotransmitters, what are used while the person is in sleep. When we are thinking about sleep, some philosophers have introduced an idea that in the same body lives two spirits.

The spirit, what is controlling the body during the daytime, and the spirit that will control the body while sleeping, and those spirits would be like day and night. The most brilliant mind has the darkest followers. And when we are thinking deeper this philosophical idea, we must realize that the model of that theory is forming, because we are taking very big freedoms in our dreams, and make things, what we ever do in the daytime.

So are dreams made for giving us therapy? The place in our mind, where we can handle the most difficult things, what we can imagine. But when we are thinking about dreams and hallucinations, we can think, that the creature of the day must step away from the creature of the night. And when we have slept long enough, the sleep would push that creature away from our mind.

Last I must mention one interesting thought, what I have seen on the Internet. That writing was explained dreams and sleep, that pineal gland in our brains would receive some kind of radiation during our daytime, and while we are sleeping that organ connects itself to our memory. "Radiation" would mean in this case the impulses, what are coming from our senses.

There is another strange explanation for dreams, which are connected to the pineal gland. In this theory, the pineal gland must make contact with some other thing, what is in some other universe or dimension. This thought is taken from some shamans, who are explained that human being or the mind of a human is connected to the duplicate, what is in some other dimension. So in this theory, what origin I don't remember every one of us might have a duplicate in some other universe or dimension, and after a certain time, we must bargain with that spirit. And this would be the connection of the spiritual world, what might call as "other universe" or " other dimension".

Fascinating way to think

Fascinating way to think

Many people see different things in the same portrait or the same texts, what artists have meant. This is the thing in the symbol function. That means that the image can be translated in many ways, and if we are going back to the "Eye of Horus" many people sees the pineal gland in that figure. Somebody else sees even the "Kugelblitz" spacecraft and the last ones are seeing the image of a black hole in that "eye".

They are saying that the "eye of Horus" is similar to the image of a black hole. And here I must say, that people have the right to take freedoms with those translations and conclusions. I don't know any priest of Horus, who can tell me the "real purpose" of that figure. This kind of thought is free, but the reason, why some people are seeing things differently than others would happen because our brains are filling the images differentially, and the books, what we are reading and the other things, what we are doing are modeling things in our brains.

And sometimes the social environment, where people are living is causing a different kind of things. Sometimes some people are telling their ideas and imaginations other people easier than others. This kind of thing would cause other people to dare to be more peculiar than others. Those people are daring to introduce more sophisticated and radical opinions than others. And this is the idea of art and philosophy.

Make people dare to think originally, and introduce also extraordinary ideas. That thing makes research, development, and philosophy more interesting. If we want to make colorful science, we must realize, that we must not always expect, that there is possible to create some formula, what can explain everything, but we can try to create those formulas. If we don't even try, we cannot ever find out the truth. And this makes this kind of thing fascinating.

We can follow the road of philosophers and try to explain our opinions by using rhetorical argumentation, and that would make also extraordinary, and hard to prove things more acceptable. When we are talking about science, religion, and art, those things bring great feelings in the mind of people. And in science, we must realize, that this thing, what bases on the model of observations, theory, and philosophy is supporting the change. Transformation is the only thing, which is stable.

Our attitudes in society and opinions about many things are chancing during our lifetime. And the thing that would modify our point of view things is the new observations. Observation and confirmed observations have a little difference. Observations are things, that happen only once, and the thing, that makes them confirmed is the simultaneous things, where is collected the evidence of the observation. And there are many things, what we can observe, but we cannot explain.

The thing that black holes would be interesting objects because they can pull the light inside them is not making them the most usual objects in the universe. Those supermassive objects are the most extreme things, what we can ever think, and in fact, normal and supermassive black holes are fascinating, but not typical objects. If we think the thing, what remains after most of the stars would detonate or erupt, is far from black holes.

Only the biggest stars can form a black hole after they detonate. And when we are thinking the opposite extreme object red- or brown dwarfs, those stars are also interesting. They are sometimes erupting and the flares would burn the planets, but the reason for those eruptions might be that star would increase its size, and suddenly gravity wins, and then the nuclear reactions inside those stars would increase and the result would be a flare.

The difference between red dwarfs and brown dwarfs is that the last ones would not have nuclear reactions all the time. The size of the red dwarf is not big, and there are astronomers, who believe that brown dwarfs can be even smaller than Jupiter. And when we are thinking about what happens when this kind of star would burn all its hydrogen, there is maybe not a very big difference between the brown dwarf and the dwarf star, which has lost its fuel.

Those stars would live forever because the fusion inside the brown dwarfs would happen in the small area inside the star. And those stars would pull more hydrogen for them from the area, what locates near the star. So this replacement fuel would make active dwarf stars a very long life. The passive dwarf stars are white dwarfs, where is not a nuclear reaction inside them. This kind of thing makes science fascinating.

Are nano-sized black holes one form of the dark material?

Are nano-sized black holes one form of the dark material?

So what is the dark material? This is the question of the day. Normally we are forgetting one simple thing, what can form material, what we cannot observe. That thing is the singularity, the nano-sized black holes, which are smaller than the electrons or quarks, and that thing can explain the dark material. But as you see this is the philosophical writing without any scientific proof. 

Today I have a day when I think very much dark material, and this day could be named as the "day of dark material". And at least I will write about the form of dark material, and what it can be. So is the answer to that question, what is the form of this very interesting material simple the singularity, what is forming inside the nucleus of atoms, or in theory nono-size, black holes can form also inside protons and neutrons, and even inside electrons. 

In this case, electromagnetic radiation that hits single atoms can cause that their electric capacity would rise. And when the capacity is high enough that energy is forming the tiny black hole inside the particles of an atom. And this thing would explain the dark material or at least part of this strange material, what existence we know, but we cannot observe it. 

Are the steaming or exploding nano-size black holes causing the forming of dark energy? Are the most of the material of universe tie in the black holes, what are smaller than electrons? And would that thing explain everything about dark material? Here I just want to say, that this writing is only hypothetical thought about theoretical materials and research. 

But what that means in real life, if part of dark material is in the tiny black holes? That means that the universe would be full of very small black holes, which are traveling in the universe, but this thing feels impossible. The small size singularity would be steamed in very little time. So could those steaming small black holes causing the effect, what we are known as dark energy. 

This thing opens the one small thing in my mind, and that is could we someday form this kind of material. In theory, everything seems very easy. The system must just create tiny black holes inside the nucleus of the atoms or particles of atoms. And could that thing do simply by targeting high-energy radio waves to the thing, what we want to turn to dark material? 

If we are thinking the spacecraft what have the form of the saucer, in the middle of that craft could be set the high-power radio transmitter. When that system would start to act, it can create the black holes in the nucleus of atoms. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLUzJeto0Wo

Could the newest school of thoughts of philosophy named "Astrophilosophy"?

Could the newest school of thoughts of philosophy named "Astrophilosophy"?

When somebody is talking about futurology, what is science that research people relationship with technological advantages and their influence on society, we must realize, that there are many similarities with the writing of novels. Nobody has seen future, or at least nobody ever has given any prove about, what is happening in the future, or what kind of advantages there will be in far after the hundreds or thousands of years. And that's why people would sometimes call the futurology as "Astrophilosophy". That thing would consist of the thought about hypothetical space colonies and travel to other solar systems.

Astrophilosophy would be similar than the philosophy of state or "Platonism". It would handle the human and our society's relationship with astronomy and the universe. What would be right, and what would be wrong, when we would start to colonize the universe. Things like protecting nature on some planet, which is dangerous for us, but what might be the level of bacteria is an interesting way to think about the conquering space.

Or if we would someday force to leave our home planet Earth, have we right to enter the young solar system, and sterilize some of it's planets to our new home? And if we would force to leave Earth, and it would happen because of pollution, would we let the same thing continue in the new home planet? This kind of things might be interesting to think before we would start to create new colonies in the Universe.

When we are creating new colonies, we must realize, that we should also give them something. If they are the only side, what gives things, that would mean that this colony would cut the relationship to Earth. When we would create colonies, the persons who would send to that mission would be most intelligent and perfectly trained. 

But if the journey would take hundreds or thousands of years, the colonialists would be born children, who have not even seen or hear Earth. And that would make social pressures to the relationship between Earth and it's hypothetical civilizations, but the problem is that those civilizations would turn aliens to Earth on together. And the thing is that maybe Earth would not in those visions be the number one, and it would turn to one of the colonies, or in the worst visions worse than average colonies.

The thing is that those highly intelligent persons could start to manipulate their abilities, and that means that they might turn to very highly intelligent, and also they can adapt themselves to new environments. And those environments could be different kind of places than Earth. Those colonies might start to send their colonialists to other planets, and they would not even tell that thing to Earth.

And why they should do that thing? Those hypothetical colonies might communicate with Earth from hundreds of light-years. That thing might take too long for communication. Then the colony would start to live it's own life away from the Earth.

When I wrote this text one thing brought to my head. And that thing is why when youngsters would write things like this, they are using their imaginations. But when elder people are thinking and writing this kind of things, they are making theories.

This is a thing, what makes me sometimes think, how many good writers could have lost because people attitude is that they are childish. When we are thinking about novels and writings, what are created by some writer, we can say, that many of them are still a theory. But why only elder people are making theories? This is a very interesting question. And sometimes people would think that the people who will write about their thoughts are some kind of autistic. That thing is a really interesting way to think.

About the philosophical schools of thoughts

About the philosophical schools of thoughts

Philosophical schools of thoughts are many times mentioned in the biographies of philosophers. There are found many interesting schools of thoughts, like Neoplatonists, Leipzigeans, Modern German and many more ways to think about things. There is seen many very good ideas, how to put those persons in the boxes, where people can choose, what school of thoughts of philosophy would the philosopher advocate.

And this kind of things are good looking, but if the philosopher self should put self to some of those boxes, that thing would be really difficult. If there would be the allowance to become a philosopher, what depends on the knowledge, what shool advocator the philosopher would be, there would be no philosopher on Earth, who would not have peptic ulcer or who even wrote a single word.

When we are thinking about things like putting people to boxes, that thing would be a nice way to destroy the interest of philosophy in the beginning. Those things like classes of philosophers make studies very hard, and very complicated. And one thing, what people might not understand is that the thing in philosophy is to teach a person to think own thoughts.

Not copy other people thoughts. Even a child can make copies of texts, and in that case, the person must not even understand a thing. I don't speak languages like Japan, but I could copy texts if I can copy marks from one place to another, and I must not understand a thing about that. 

Sometimes some people asked me when I started to write, whose thoughts I will write. In those cases, I don't care a thing, what other people thought. But when some person, who knows everything better than I come to ask things like that, they should tell, what that kind of things are meaning to them? Who cares, who have written those words?

When we are thinking about those words, what is the matter, is the writer of the words some Plato from Ancient Greece, or some modern philosopher? When we are thinking the modern philosophy, we can ask, how modern that thing could be Advocators of the modern philosophy shool is mentioned persons like John Locke, who lived in the last 17th century. That thing means that there are only a few changes in the way of thinking in the knowledge theory. Locke lived about 300 years ago, and that man is still very qualified philosopher.

What Nietzsche meant when he said that when you staring to emptiness, emptiness is looking back to you?

What Nietzsche meant when he said that when you staring to emptiness, emptiness is looking back to you?

In the beginning, we might think that Nietzche meant that if we are just staring some person or place, we cannot find out a thing from that person's opinions or thoughts. Even parrot can repeat things, what other people say, but creating own ideas makes discussions more interesting. Or maybe we just throw some books to the table and read answers from those texts, what are made somebody else.

That allows us to say, that somebody else has said those words, but does that make us glad? Other people would say, that they will read those things rather from the books, and that's why we should start learning to think ourselves about some things because own ideas will take world and society ahead. If we are looking at the mirror, we might see a handsome person, who is somehow stranger to us. Are we looking like that character, what we see in the mirror?

We choose our clothes by using requirements or criteria, that they should be comfortable and look good and being adult. But how we can make our soft pants looking like an adult? When we are looking at the mirror, we see some over-aged hip hop guy, and then we might think that should we take our wife or girlfriend to shop for choosing our clothes? Maybe they are looking better when somebody else is choosing them.

But if somebody else is choosing those clothes, we can blame that other person about terrible looking clothes. But in that case, we must remember that in the case, that some clothes look like awful, we must realize that the decision of the buying those clothes is the thing, what we must do alone. We are the person who wears those clothes. But otherwise, if we are asking somebody to come with us to store, we must remember not to hurt that person.

And that's why we should go alone. If we don't want to listen to other people, why we are taking them with us, and if we are making that asking for nothing, that might cause anger reaction, and that person asks "why would you next time go alone? The money is mine, so I go alone. When we are staring ourselves, we might think that should we choose our clothes better way, or should we choose the new barber? Or maybe we just need to choose the restaurant to the place, where is offered food, what have fewer carbohydrates.

Normally we ever hear our voice as other people hear it because the sound would travel across our skull. And actually, the inventor of gramophone Thomas Edison was the first person, whoever hears his voice. 

This phrase is a very interesting thing when we are thinking about things, what we see in Social media and everyday life. One of the explanations is that every people can say or repeat, what other people have said. And that might seem very nice, but then Nietsche might mean, that he can read everything from books, and why this philosopher must ask everything because he already knows the answer.

 Sometimes we see the very interesting thing in social media, and that is that somebody is always telling or ordering people, what they should think or write in that discussion forum. But there is always another kind of explanations for that phrase. That explanation is that when people are looking at the space or universe to look for far bigger and extraordinary, what we are, we are forgetting the thing, that we should find the answers from inside us.

The universe is a very big place, and we are so little thing in that structure. So the thing is that if we are looking for things like aliens, we must see things, what is hiding in ourselves. The thing what we cannot see or what we cannot feel still exists.

But how this is connected to things, what Nietsche has said? The thing is that we can stare to emptiness forever, and the only thing what we see is our face. And then we can say, that there is nobody. The situation is similar if we would stare to some person, and say nothing to that inmate.

During a staring session, we can make conclusions of that person without saying a word, and things like clothes are giving a very good image of that inmate. Maybe that person has a nice suit and slips, and we think that person is a well trained, academically civilized person, but the truth is that this inmate can also be some door- to door salesman, who has ever been in schools.

About the Science Fiction novels and the way how people handle things in those books

About the Science Fiction novels and the way how people handle things in those books

When we are thinking about the SciFi books we are facing the attitude, that scientists always work imprudently. And military men are going to fix the errors, what scientists make. This is the normal attitude around the media when they are talking about weapon research and military contractors.

The men, who made nuclear bomb were criminals, and military personnel, who operate those bombs are innocent poor people, who are forced to use those weapons. But then we might take another point of view about those things, and ask "why we always must benefit everything, what somebody offers?".

When we are thinking about the scientists, who are working in the secret research plants in somewhere at other planets, we must say, that the persons who are making that kind of bases and make the things like contacting to another civilization possible are persons, who are making this kind of things possible. If we are thinking about the philosophical problem about crime, where somebody leaves the weapon in the hands of the people, who would use it against somebody else, we must realize that the person, who gives the opportunity and tool for crime is the same way guilty as the person, who uses that weapon.

Especially if the person who gives the weapon, and knows that the inmate uses it against other people are guilty of giving that weapon. But the person who uses and takes that weapon is making own decision about the use of lethal force, and that means that it would release the actor from responsibility. The user of the weapon is guilty about things, what the weapon makes when it is in the hand of the user.

Another way to think about scientists is that they are some kind of children, who don't understand, what they are doing. But when we are thinking otherwise, scientists are creating weapons, and weapons are toys in the hands of the military. And the point is that adults are making toys for children.

An adult person stands the criticism, what is targeting the adult person's personality. When scientists make their work, they must think, what they are going to do, and use self-criticism about their work.  So would we buy an assault rifle to the child? The thing is that we must not make or buy everything that we see and create everything that comes in our mind.

When we are observing this kind of things more careful, we might compare that kind of things in the point of view of a child who is left alone in the house with the tinderbox. In that case, the circumstances, what are making some actions possible are the house. So if we would leave the child without attention to that house and tinderbox in hand, there are very big problems ahead.

 If we don't give instructions, what that child must do, the case is that sooner or later the house would burn. The thing is that the person, who lives a child in the house should know, that something would happen, especially if that adult person would say, that "use that tinderbox as the light". So if the instructions are wrong,  the results would be extremely dangerous. And if we would leave somebody without attention on some other planet, could the results be something else, then we want.

Bugs and super-fast evolution.

Bugs and super-fast evolution. 

This is the philosophical writing about hypothetical intelligence, what we might someday meet in some distant world. Or maybe we will face the intelligent species on earth. If we think that the bugs are primitive organisms what has an extremely fast life cycle, we might think that those organisms would not have a chance to advance as the intelligent. But then we must realize that the fast life cycle allows the super fast evolution in the population.

The question about what if we would have another intelligent species on Earth is the question, what is sometimes in our mind. When we are thinking about the intelligence of the ants and bees, we must realize that we haven't research those things very much. We have just thought that those species would not be intelligent, because we cannot discuss with them.

We have always cherished the thought, that every intelligent species are animals, and we haven't remembered that another intelligent species might be a different looking and different type, what we are used to thinking. In those cases, we should remember, that bugs and vegetables are communicating with very complicated chemical combinations. Sometimes I have thought that is it possible, that some intelligent species would be the combinations of vegetables and bugs.

That means that the intelligent vegetable might use the bug or animal as the tool or robot, what it controls by using pheromones and the electric signals that are coming from the roots. When we are thinking about pheromone communication and things like sleep paralysis, we must realize that the same chemicals, what bugs and vegetables used for communication can also influence our brains, and could it be possible that those pheromones would cause sleep paralysis.

The extreme fear reaction during the nightmare. When people think about this kind of things, they would have one thing in the mind. The trunk without leaves seems like the veins what are giving nutrient for the human brains. So this has been caused the idea, that maybe in somewhere could be another intelligent species. But then some people ask, why those another intelligent species would be so quiet?

If the plants or some bugs would have collective intelligence, which means that when the entire swarm of the bees is connecting their brains together by using physical contact or pheromones, what acts as neurotransmitters, those animals would have intelligence. But why they haven't been in the United Nations for demand the same rights, what human have?

When we are thinking about the bugs, they have an ability to research as the intelligent species. The life-cycle of a single bug is very short, but they could transmit the entire memory to the next generation. The fast life cycle means that the single unit of the group is impossible to understand things. But it can transfer the experiences to its descendants.

And in this hypothesis, those species would be intelligent as a group. They would use intelligence when they would need it, and then that group would share the missions to each individual. When the individuals would separate from the swarm, they would become the ordinary bugs.

The thing, what makes this thing very interesting is that the short life cycle would make possible the super fast evolution. That is giving the possibility, about somewhere away from the human eyes would live intelligent bees or some other bugs.

Why physics don't think and philosopher think?

Why physics don't think and philosopher think?

When physics make something, that person is connected to the observations, what has been made. That means physics must make every decision by using the tools like particle accelerators and prove every single word, what that person says, and the thing, what makes the life of physics sometimes really boring is that they must reserve those physical tools for their tests. And every part of the life of physics is connected to the material and nothing else can exist than material. The thing, what makes the life of physics so stiff is the need to prove those things.

But here we must say that the philosopher must also prove the things, what that person claims. But the proof must be done by using the rhetoric method. In real life philosophy or pure philosophy, the philosopher must use language and rhetorics to make the opponent become convicted that the thing, what the philosopher says is the truth. So the philosopher should not make empiric tests in the work. In some claiming physics just conducts things what that person sees to the form of doctoral dissertation.

So what is the doctor of philosophy?

Philosopher has the freedom to take also other dimensions in the work than physics. That means that the philosopher would take the spiritual aspect along with material if that person can convict people that the thing, what philosopher claims is true by using rhetoric way to confuse people. So that's why the philosophy is a more flexible thing than some kind of physics.

 When we are thinking about the doctoral degree of philosophy, we must understand that the doctors of mathematics and many other abstract sciences are actually the doctors of philosophy. And here we can think that mathematics is so-called empiric science, but it is actually also the part of philosophy or abstract science. When we are thinking about the doctoral thesis about mathematics, we are facing thing, that the word of mathematics is an abstract word.

Every single part of that thesis must be made by using the methodology, what mathematics has been accepted. And every single part of mathematics bases the thing, that we have ten fingers. That thing has brought us the numeric system, where we are using the decimal system, what bases the number ten. And somebody has thought that what if the Sumerian high priest, what has accepted the numeric system would be lost one finger. Would that mean that we would have a decimal system, what bases the number 9?

Or what if some mathematicians would create an idea that the calculations would go linear way. That means that the brackets would not have mean, and the multiplication would not have a special place in the formula? So what kind of world would be in that kind of cases? Would it somehow different than it is today?

Of course, there are numbers, what has no opponent in the normal life. Those numbers are called as the complex numbers, and that thing is a little bit interesting. The complex numbers have two points in coordinates. And that means that we cannot use them in real life.

The real number is the thing, what we can calculate normally, but the complex part, what is above the coordinates of Y-axel is impossible to model in some shops. But that kind of numbers is the product of very clever mathematicians use of brains. Those things are a really interesting way to think.

The Philosopher's Stone (Why one stone is different?)

The Philosopher's Stone (Why one stone is different?)

The Philosopher's Stone is a mythical item like some kind of version of the "Holy Grail". And sometimes I have thought that this kind of Item is not actually physical thing like some real stone or something like that. Or maybe The Philosopher's Stone was the stone, what was painted by using a certain way, and that would be marked for membership of some community. So it was the stone, what Philosopher owned.

Or maybe it was the thought about the group of stones. And the mission, what master gave the student was to think, why there is a couple of stones, and why one of those stones was different? Was The Philosopher's Stone actually the item, what every philosopher carried in their pocket, and why did they do that?

The alchemists looked for the spiritual aspects from their experiments, and that means that The Philosopher's Stone is not actually the item. I could also be a way of think. or maybe it's the stone, what is painted, and what shows the membership of the secret community of alchemists. 

But then we must realize one thing, and that is the alchemists talked by using the allegories, and maybe The Philosopher's Stone is the thing, what alchemists used to make people think about things more carefully. And if we are thinking about things like Philosopher, we should ask one thing, when we see the stone in some rack. That question is, why this stone is put on the rack, and if there is something special like painting, we must realize, that the paint could be the white phosphorous.

If that thing is put on the papers, and somebody steals them, that would cause that entire house will burn. When we are thinking about the role of the alchemists, we must realize, that those people must hide their real purpose of the experiments, and that's why they must use the allegories and another kind of things.

The thing is that alchemists were proto-scientists, who made many interesting and remarkable notifications and inventions in the field of early science. But as we know, they were also looking for the spiritual roads to things like living forever and making gold from every part on the Earth.

About the intelligence of the trees

About the intelligence of the trees

We have always been interested in the opportunity to find another intelligent special on Earth and Universe. When we are thinking about the intelligence of the vegetables and trees, we might have noticed that the trees, what have dropped them leaves, the form of the trunk seems like the veins of the brains. And that thing has brought in the mind one thing, would the trees have some kind of extremely primitive intelligence.

When we would think about the intelligence of the plants, and their ability to communicate with other species, we might first laugh. But then we might think this case more careful, and then we are looking at some well known Meadows, and suddenly we see the animal paths on those grass yards.

Sometimes we might think, why animals and humans are following those paths, and why there are no buildings on those places? When we are thinking about the plants and their intelligence, we must understand that those vegetables are communicating with pheromones. And does some of those pheromones influence to human brains, that the people will rest those vegetables in peace.

 When we are looking at the silly things, we might notice that near the harmless vegetables surrounding them is always found very poisonous flowers. And maybe that is only the coincidence that the end of the lines of the bushes is very often the dry bush. Or the bush, what don't have leaves and that means that the bush is offering the mask against deers and other vegetable-eating animals. Maybe this is only the coincidence but it brings many thoughts in my mind.

One of them is that could we someday benefit this kind of primitive intelligence in computing? If we would connect the cells, what is making that primitive thinking with microchips, we would create the planet size intelligence network. But the thing is that if we would have access to benefit those pheromones in the actions of security.

And if some person would be in the sight of the gun, the shooter would send the pheromones, what are used to protect vegetables against the danger, and that thing would, in theory, deny the violence. If that pheromone would spray in the clothes, that thing would save some people in case of attack.

The writing about our relationship about death

The writing about our relationship about death

One of the most difficult questions in philosophy is, how we will act opposite side if there is playing dying player?

Sometimes I have asked myself, that why the main character of the movies, what are told about dying is ever been the man, who looks like Santa Claus who is covered by tattoos. Those people need empathy same way as the cute nice girls.  Have you seen the movie "Cool kids don't cry"? It's a story about the girl, who is dying in cancer, and the things, what the classmates would do with her. And there is one thing, what I started to think when I looked at the trailer.

The thing is concerning the scene, where that character played the football as a goalkeeper, and that thing made me think about one thing, and sometimes I feel like a heartless bastard when I'm thinking about that thing, what is sometimes in those cases, where the dying patient comes to the team. The thing is that we all want to give joy and happiness to those people, whose life will be ending too soon, but have you ever thought, what might happen if the thing about cancer has not told to some players in the opposite side?

They could kick the ball with full force, and then that patient might break the bones, or here I must ask one question, what I ever dare: would you score to that goal? I sometimes thought that there would be the pupil or student, who would ever make goals before, and then that person would make the only score to the goal, what is guarded by a cancer patient. Would that person be happy about that goal?

I think that this thing is really embarrassing for everybody. Or how would those players act, if the player would die in Hepatitis B, what is caused by the use of drugs? Or what if that person would be an adult man, who is dying in liver cirrhosis, what has been caused because of heavy drinking? This is an interesting thing because also dossers would need empathy at that moment. Would we show empathy to the elder man, who looks like Santa Claus or the person, who is dying because of the use of doping? The liver can be destroyed also because of using the anabolic steroids, so would we support the person, who is full of tattoos, and looks like a little bit less cute than the young girl?

Moral problems are not easy to solve

This is the moral problem, what I have sometimes thought. Is morally justified to make scores to goals, what are guarded by a person, who might die very soon. Sometimes there is claiming that the game is game, and otherwise, there is an ethic problem, because that person should win in the last game, what that person would ever play, and this kind of things are really difficult.

How would you answer this kind of questions? Or what if this person plays very often in front of the goal? Is that acceptable in a moral and ethic point of view to think? Is it right to use that kind of player for making sure, that the opposite players would not dare to make goals? And how that thing would influence another player of that team?  Is this thing acceptable or not, this is the question, there are no simple answers.

The intelligent mycoplasma can control robots

Illustration photo
(Picture I)

The intelligent mycoplasma can control robots

Above this text is photograph about Trinity, the first atomic weapon in the world, and there is a strange thing about this photograph. The weapon itself is the ball-shaped object, what is covered by the steel ball, and there are the wires of the electronic sensors around this ball. And this image has bought in my mind, that what if we would in someday create the intelligent mycoplasma by connecting the genomes of neurons with the genomes of the mycoplasma cells, and that artificially created, the intelligent organism could control the systems around it by using the EEG-system and the computer decoder, what will transform the thoughts of that brain, what looks like slime to the robot.

By using this technology, mankind can create a robot, which is even more intelligent, than we are. And when we are thinking about the risks of this kind of biological experiment, they would be huge, because that kind of mycoplasma is actually a really dangerous thing. If we would equip some kind of space probe with this kind of liquid intelligent life form, what can be created by ourselves, that creature would have their own will, and that thing makes this kind of things really dangerous.

That intelligent mycoplasma might become more intelligent than it's creators, and in the case that we would connect the genomes of the neuro-cells with the mycoplasma or mushroom cells, we can create the creature, what is the more intelligent than we are. The living intelligent creatures are really problematic because they might want to protect themselves against any attack.

Defending self against threats are normal in the word of biological organisms and that kind of behavior, what mission is to make the species able to survive against the beasts makes sure that the actions biological artificial intelligence might be harder to predict than the electronic artificial intelligence. The artificial brains can operate like human brains if it would set in the tank, where is two-way EEG-communication system, where the sensors of the robot or spacecraft would send their data to that mycoplasma, and the mycoplasma would control the systems of the robot or spacecraft.

The feeding of that mycoplasma would happen by giving it biological produced liquid form nutrient, and that artificial brains would make the revolution in the technology. Sometimes I have wonder, that if the UFO crash-down in Cape Girardeau might be real, the thing is that the U.S government would hide that kind of things under some very secretive laboratories, what might covered as the nuclear storages.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread631897/pg1

Picture I

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2015/07/70-years-since-trinity-when-we-test/n02_GadgetC939c10/main_900.jpg?1437073926

The time moving slow

The time moving slow

When we are thinking about the things, what would happen in the distant future, is the thing that does the people, who are living after us, that this early 21st century is the similar way the medieval period, as some 13th century is to us. Then we must think about the time of about 800 years after us, we might think that we might be quite different than people are today. In that time the information technology will control everything, and in some scenarios, the Internet will make possible that the national states would just vanish because of the influence of the international network of information.

The 13th century was 800 years ago, and the 29th century would become 800 years after our generation. This means that if we are thinking about the time, and when we are reading about history, we might face the thing, that in the timeline between the 30-years' war and the modern time have been about 8 generations, if we would calculate that the war began in the year 1600 and each generation lives about 50 years.

Real year of the beginning of that war was 1618 and the people will live longer than the 50 years. And when we are thinking about the period of the 13th century to the modern era there would be 16 generations between that era and ourselves. If we think that person lives about 50 years, and sometimes I have thought that would some case, what happen in that era cause the hate, what causes the violence in the modern parking area? Is it possible that some families hate together from the medieval period? So the idea in this text was to think, would our descendants call this time as the medieval period in the 39th century?