Ariel...
POSTED BY: freelancertex
UPDATED: Monday, January 7, 2008 15:01
VIEWED: 11057
PAGE 7 of 7
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
There is absolutely no reason why mind-reading and knowing the future happen in the same mechanism. In fact, I think it'd be damned unlikely that they do. A brain is a physical, chemical structure, one that exists in the here and now, and a person's thoughts, memories, and emotional state are written there. The future... well, now you're talking a whole different deal. The future doesn't exist. Precog is a lot harder to pass off as sci-fi.
Is it bad that what you say makes perfect sense to me? :)
A word on ESP, first. RiverFlan, where did ya read telekinesis is considered ESP? It really says that? Well, the book is wrong! :) Telekinesis, lit. 'causing movement from a distance' (presumably by the psyche, hence probably better known as 'psychokinesis') is not something I would, my own self, file under 'perception' (extra or otherwise). It's all in the realm of parapsychology, though.
I believe mind reading exists, yes. But I'm also of the belief it has nothing to do with electromagnetic signals of the brain and such. To me, it's more a spiritual matter: 'spiritual' in the literal sense, as in pertaining to the human spirit (or soul, rather, encased in a spirit body, to be precise). I would ere call it soul-to-soul communication. Soul-perceptions. I think every human has em; for instance, in varying degrees of sensibility, we can all sense it when someone is staring us in the back. And I think they can be developed too, but I digress.
From books I read on parapsychology, when I was still a wee child, I recall astronaut Edgar Mitchell used Zener cards to test for telepathy in an unofficial experiment during the Apollo 14 mission to the moon in 1971. And one of the (expected) outcomes was that distance doesn't matter. So, spiritual phenomenon or no, at least I believe it occurs extra-dimensional: on a plane where distance either doesn't matter or takes on a completely different meaning. And it don't surprise me none the CIA is clueless; how they expect to find something so subtle? They can't even find Bin Laden. :)
Telekinesis I find plausible, too. I still, to this date, have to chuckle when I think back on what Hofstadter once cleverly remarked on the subject: "Mind over matter, or matter over mind? If you don't mind, it doesn't matter!" :) LOL. I actually think it's mind over matter.
Precog stuff, well that's indeed an entirely different beast. Assuming it even exists, there's no law says you'd have to perceive it in an extra-sensory fashion: because 'being' in the future, you could just perceive it with your regular senses. So, the question is more, is time travel possible? Future and politics, little girl. Situation is always fluid. :) Okay, the whole thing goes: "The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves." Oh wait, got confused again. :) At any rate, I doubt precog is really possible. For one, because even the act of seeing the future changes said future! To measure something is to disturb it (much lilke you cannot stick a thermometer in a bath tub to measure how hot the water is, without, in doing so, disturing said temperature). So, foreseeing the future changes that future insofar that when the foreseen moment arrives, it's already different from the 'original' in that you have the memory of having seen it before.
Okay, now my brain hurts. :)
--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm just going to throw this out here and I'm sure someone can tell me why it's wrong.
River can read people's minds. River has an incredible brain. With the information she has available to her and the brain she uses to interpret that information couldn't she simply be very good at predicting the future.
There's a difference between knowing the future (precognition) and just guessing.
In Ariel the natural assumption is that she saw a little while into the future and saw that the person was going to die, but there were two people who, if you combined their knowledge, would have seen it coming. The one who gave the patient the wrong medication knew what medication the patient had, Simon (and likely several others) knew it was the wrong one. River had access to both of their brains, couldn't she has simply worked it out.
River seemed to know Mal was coming back in Safe, but any one of us could have made that prediction equally well knowing what we know of Mal (though the timing was harder to predict.)
River knew that Petaline was having a baby before Petaline did, but if she was in Petaline's head and either Simon's or one of the whores who had given birth before it could be reasonable for her to know what was coming based on sensations Petaline wasn't able to interpret.
River said, "Fire," in Out of Gas but given what she seems to know about ships, that Kaylee had been fairly vocal about which part wasn't working, and the "hiccup" that could be an educated guess too.
There are definitely times when it seems River is a few seconds (or more) ahead of the rest of the 'verse, but I'm thinking that it could be that she's more like a chess player looking a few moves ahead than like Usul seeing the endgame that's already been written.
On the other hand she could just see the future.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
River can read people's minds. River has an incredible brain. With the information she has available to her and the brain she uses to interpret that information couldn't she simply be very good at predicting the future.
There's a difference between knowing the future (precognition) and just guessing.
In Ariel the natural assumption is that she saw a little while into the future and saw that the person was going to die, but there were two people who, if you combined their knowledge, would have seen it coming. The one who gave the patient the wrong medication knew what medication the patient had, Simon (and likely several others) knew it was the wrong one. River had access to both of their brains, couldn't she has simply worked it out.
River seemed to know Mal was coming back in Safe, but any one of us could have made that prediction equally well knowing what we know of Mal (though the timing was harder to predict.)
River knew that Petaline was having a baby before Petaline did, but if she was in Petaline's head and either Simon's or one of the whores who had given birth before it could be reasonable for her to know what was coming based on sensations Petaline wasn't able to interpret.
River said, "Fire," in Out of Gas but given what she seems to know about ships, that Kaylee had been fairly vocal about which part wasn't working, and the "hiccup" that could be an educated guess too.
There are definitely times when it seems River is a few seconds (or more) ahead of the rest of the 'verse, but I'm thinking that it could be that she's more like a chess player looking a few moves ahead than like Usul seeing the endgame that's already been written.
On the other hand she could just see the future.
I don't disagree on any particular point. In fact, I see it exactly so.
--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I always thought Firefly writers fell victim (and hoped we did, too) to the 10% Brain Usage Myth for their watery explanation of River's psychic abilities coupled with her high cognitive function. Of course, there is little scientific evidence to support such claims of human cranial capacity compared to our actual brain usage, which for most people I encounter is about 3 percent (purely, an estimation on my part).
Telepathy, precog, kinesis, etc, seem to be common day abilities of futuristic humans in alternative universes. I do think River may be the first character, I've run across though, to have a Mensa sized IQ and Level 5 Dance Dance Revolution moves.
In short, Joss and company know zilch about brain function and psychic abilities and didn't bother to consult with any expert or with a parapsychologist, except to watch Bill Murray in Ghostbusters.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by asarian:
I believe mind reading exists, yes. But I'm also of the belief it has nothing to do with electromagnetic signals of the brain and such. To me, it's more a spiritual matter: 'spiritual' in the literal sense, as in pertaining to the human spirit (or soul, rather, encased in a spirit body, to be precise). I would ere call it soul-to-soul communication. Soul-perceptions. I think every human has em; for instance, in varying degrees of sensibility, we can all sense it when someone is staring us in the back. And I think they can be developed too, but I digress.
From books I read on parapsychology, when I was still a wee child, I recall astronaut Edgar Mitchell used Zener cards to test for telepathy in an unofficial experiment during the Apollo 14 mission to the moon in 1971. And one of the (expected) outcomes was that distance doesn't matter. So, spiritual phenomenon or no, at least I believe it occurs extra-dimensional: on a plane where distance either doesn't matter or takes on a completely different meaning.
Precog stuff, well that's indeed an entirely different beast. Assuming it even exists, there's no law says you'd have to perceive it in an extra-sensory fashion: because 'being' in the future, you could just perceive it with your regular senses. So, the question is more, is time travel possible?
You are assuming precog requires your own presence in the future, which would require time-travel. Time travel has major problems in terms of physical transmittal.
Remote viewing does not engage the transferrance of being to another place and/or time, but only a focused type of mind reading - mostly looking through the target person's eyes, sensing their optical input. If you are viewing the optical input of another, it does not matter how far away they are, and it has also been proven to not matter if it is in the future.
From what you have described above as your understnading, this also allows the reading of spirits/souls no longer living. So psychics who commune with the deceased are also included here.
Have any of you seen that primetime show that "investigated" technical remote viewing? It was about 8 or 10 years ago on ABC or NBC, some show like "48hours" or somesuch? I was amazed that a big network would put that on primetime, but they covered themselves pretty well. They did do a "live" demonstration, although being television, they could have edited a fictional account, but they stated they did not.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
You are assuming precog requires your own presence in the future, which would require time-travel. Time travel has major problems in terms of physical transmittal.
No, you are assuming I assumed that. :) I just said: "There's no law says you'd HAVE to perceive it in an extra-sensory fashion: because 'being' in the future, you COULD just perceive it with your regular senses."
As for time and place, yes, I think looking into the future inevitably means you are, in essence, 'there' -- weird as that sounds. Since you're 'there' when seeing things, the "physical transmittal" part is simply absent, or has been skipped, rather. It's like seeing myself at work, 1 day in the future, while now sitting on the couch: I would, that next day, simply have traveled to work, in my car, in regular fashion. It's just that tapping into the future places me after that time, already at my desk. I know this is mind-boggling stuff, but I don't think looking into the future -- if it were at all possible, which I highly doubt -- would mean I'd "physically" have to zap out to that place: as it's simple NOT a matter of place, but of time.
Personally, I'm all for "looking through the target person's eyes, sensing their optical input," but, IMHO, that just shifts the question of the actual perception of the future to that third-party. In other words: instead of directly asking how I could perceive it, the question then becomes: how does he/she see it?
"It does not matter how far away they are,"
Agreed.
"It has also been proven to not matter if it is in the future."
Come to think of it, I actually DO rememeber that. With these Zener card experiments, you'd sometimes see a delay, as it were, where someone might predict the right sequence, but not of the current batch, yet of that of the next, for instance (or otherwise predict slightly out of sync). I do maintain though, with mal4prez, that precog is fundamentally different from 'simple' mind-reading. Though, as to a psychic, both abilities might come as easily, they've gotta be based on some fundamentally different principles.
"From what you have described above as your understnading, this also allows the reading of spirits/souls no longer living. So psychics who commune with the deceased are also included here."
Avtually, yes. :) That is precisely what I believe; a very perceptive conclusion on your end! There is, far as I know, when it comes to psychic ability, essentially no difference between mortal-to-mortal, and mortal-to-spirit communication (if we call a 'spirit' here 'a person living in the spirit world'). Both are governed by the Laws of Rapport and Communication (and, sideways, the Law of Attraction, which dictates that like attracts like). Fascinating stuff, really. But I'm not entirely sure a Firefly board is the entirely proper venue for discussing matters that border so close on religion. Next thing I know, people might come out and say I have too much snow on my roof. :)
--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Don't see how it requires tangent arguments regarding religion - although Sheppard Book is a good enough reason to have it here.
Furthermore, Joss states that Firefly/Serenity is River's story, the story of this crew through her view. Therefore, this is prezactly the place for discussions of River's abilities or possible talents.
Perhaps you could explain - how to you percieve the mechanics or instruments of "precog," and how do you consider it different from "remote viewing" - even in the future? How do you see the connection and control working, or being different? How do you precisely target a connection to a desired time/place/person?
Ooops, just reread that again. Are you saying that (IF) precog is possible, then it is only possible from your personal perspective? Only from your own future experience? So that it can only occur in a time and place when you are there? And no precog can exist past your lifetime (after you are dead)? If so, how would you explain Nostradomus, for instance? How about precog of a place you would never have been, you consider that impossible?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Perhaps you could explain - how to you percieve the mechanics or instruments of "precog," and how do you consider it different from "remote viewing" - even in the future? How do you see the connection and control working, or being different?
I consider mind-reading an almost 'trivial' function, in the sense that it takes not much of a stretch to imagine that thought-transmissions take place via a different dimension, so that 'distances' may be radically shorter from what we're used to. Or that we're, on some level, never really separated from one another to begin with (!). There are, what, like like eleven dimensions anyway? Eleven, important number, prime number; one goes into the house of eleven eleven times, but always comes out one. :) I just mean that, though we don't know yet how mind-to-mind communication works, imagining that it could work does not require a complete rewrit of the laws of known physics.
The ability to foresee the future, however, bends the mind in ways that riddle the brain with holes. :) The movie Paycheck, for example, was predicated on the idea of building a "laser-enhanced lens" which is powerful enough to see around the curvature of the universe. Because if you could see around a curve that went on forever, you would end up back where you started, looking at yourself, except not looking back at yourself now, in the present, but you'd be looking at yourself in the future. Of course, such a lense does not exist. But if it did, you'd actually see EVERYTHING in this craphill 'verse (I believe there was a Star Trek Voyager episode about that once, too). Thing of it is, though, that I'm pretty sure you wouldn't really see the future, alas, but the past. Imagine the universe were like a sphere, and we'd be on the equator, being able to look, say, 10 billion light years in either direction. Then, if you could see all the way around the universe, and back again, what you'd be seeing were events that happened 40 billion years ago! That makes seeing the future a long wait for a train don't come. Best of luck, though. :)
Hmm, just had an interesting thought. What if you were to go faster than light? Yes, that's not possible, far as we know; but work with me here. You'd be travelling backwards in time, right? Ok, that don't do you much good, as you wanted to go forward. But, to a psychic person in the past, you and your knowledge represent the future! So, what if what we call the 'now' is actually someone's past, and precog is just a manner of psychically tapping into the consciousness of the one who, from his perspective, is traveling back? It wouldn't actually have to be a person traveling backwards: could be particles (tachyons?) or some such. In other words, something that, by the act of going back, left a trail of gleanable future?
Okay, here's is where the brain cramps are setting in again! :) The flames of ignorance burn without pain! as I heard spoken today. What we really need here, I reckon, is Mr. Universe himself, Citizen. He's the only one who can really discuss these matters, and still come out looking shiny at the end of it. :)
--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME