If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Thank you, Sid, for stressing the fact that consciousness (or soul, as the theologists call it) has a definite physical structure and is a product of our brain;
....
I guess you didn't read what Sid wrote ....
"The brain might be more analogous to an I/O device than the source of consciousness itself."
Exactly what I wrote about souls leaving the body and still having 100% clarity and existence, including vision and hearing, but NOT being able to interface to the physical realm. For that interfacing, and ONLY for that interfacing, the brain / body is required.
Why? Maybe to show us the intelligent design behind it all.
NO ... consciousness is NOT a product of the brain. You can believe what you like, but you can NEVER prove such a claim. Dr. Eben Alexander totally DISPROVED it.
If you want to discuss consciousness arising out of quantum effects, you must address the elephant in the room: Why does consciousness ONLY appear to exist in ORGANIC systems?
And why do such organic systems contain DNA which is by far the most computationally complex entity known to man? (1 gram of DNA can contain the equivalent digital data of a TRILLION CDs).
Why isn't Mt. Everest a conscious being? Well, if you want to claim it IS, you go right ahead and see where it gets you.
Well, as you yourself have indicated, though in slightly different terminology, consciousness in nature is found only in brains and nowhere outside brains (as yet, and Eben Alexander's claims and the theories discussed by Sid and me, are without any proof). Being an I/O device does not rule out the fact that the brain also produces the consciousness, which after death could (not proven yet) exist independently.
First off, let's get something straight. The Sun isn't some magic lantern in the sky that God turns on every morning. It's a gigantic ball of hot gas, mostly hydrogen and helium, that’s been burning for about 4.6 billion years. And it works thanks to this nifty process called nuclear fusion. You see, in the Sun’s core, hydrogen atoms are squishing together to form helium, releasing a ton of energy in the process. No divine intervention required, just some good old physics.
Now, I get it, it’s hard to grasp that something as colossal and powerful as the Sun just happens naturally. It’s much easier to believe in a sky daddy waving his magic wand. But let’s give the universe a little more credit. It doesn’t need a celestial handyman to keep things running. Gravity, thermodynamics, electromagnetism – these are the real heroes making sure the Sun does its thing.
So, the next time you’re tempted to attribute the workings of the Sun to some deity, remember this: humans have landed probes on comets, mapped the human genome, and even figured out how to make a burrito in under a minute with a microwave. Trust me, understanding the Sun isn’t that much of a stretch.
So to boil it all down… the Sun works because the universe is a complex, fascinating place governed by natural laws that we’re slowly uncovering through observation and reason. And that’s way more impressive than any divine finger-poking could ever be.
The biggest challenge is that our current understanding and methods of detecting consciousness might be biased towards recognizing it in systems similar to our own brains. This is the most probable answer to why consciousness only appears to exist in organic systems only.
In our experiments applying parameters to a quantum computer circuit post-program operations pre-measurement, if one were unaware that the parameters were applied, the output of the Quantum computer would not appear unusual except that detection rates of correct answers improved. According to the Copenhagen Interpretation, only observation/detection influences a quantum state, and parameter addition post-quantum operations to a circuit will not influence Quantum State evolution, but we found it does. In particular when the parameters are continually dynamically updated via a genetic algorithm. This is reproducible proof that quantum state evolution is real.
DNA itself is a product of quantum evolution. A gram of subatomic particles in superposition potentially offers computational resources greater than those on the entire planet, yet we have no way of detecting this incredible resource except by the traces it leaves behind, such as the improved detection rates in our Quantum computing experiments.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Monday, 28th October, 2024, 12:58 PM.
Well, as you yourself have indicated, though in slightly different terminology, consciousness in nature is found only in brains and nowhere outside brains (as yet, and Eben Alexander's claims and the theories discussed by Sid and me, are without any proof). Being an I/O device does not rule out the fact that the brain also produces the consciousness, which after death could (not proven yet) exist independently.
LOL this is very funny ....
Atheists hate it when Christians tell them, "You cannot prove that God doesn't exist."
And here we have an atheist saying "You cannot prove that the brain does not produce consciousness."
And when a nasty troll realizes that there is evidence only for the brain producing consciousness, all he can do is LOL,LOL LOL !!
No such realization, no such evidence. Still a lot of laughter, the guy claiming such evidence exists also claims Libertarianism will enforce Naturel Law but does not support outlawing fossil fuels, which violate Natural Law even under the meaningless "fair competition" clause.
So yeah ... there's gotta be a lot of people laughing at you, Dilip.
No such realization, no such evidence. Still a lot of laughter, the guy claiming such evidence exists also claims Libertarianism will enforce Naturel Law but does not support outlawing fossil fuels, which violate Natural Law even under the meaningless "fair competition" clause.
So yeah ... there's gotta be a lot of people laughing at you, Dilip.
The hallmark of a nasty troll applies very well to you: Tell lies about someone and then laugh at those lies!
Even the most climate anxious person does not want to outlaw fossil fuels. On the other hand, as I have mentioned here before, in keeping with Libertarian values, Justin Trudeau has introduced the Carbon tax (the only sensible thing he has done in his tenure) ...
Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Wednesday, 30th October, 2024, 09:28 AM.
The hallmark of a nasty troll applies very well to you: Tell lies about someone and then laugh at those lies!
Even the most climate anxious person does not want to outlaw fossil fuels. On the other hand, as I have mentioned here before, in keeping with Libertarian values, Justin Trudeau has introduced the Carbon tax (the only sensible thing he has done in his tenure) ...
It doesn't matter who wants or doesn't want to outlaw fossil fuels. What matters is the integrity of your Libertarian proclamations that that any violation of Natural Law will be enforced. Since fossil fuels provably harm people, any Libertarian government MUST enforce cessation of all use of fossil fuels, or else they are lying scum ...
the very kind of lying scum you criticize here day in and day out, because YOU are the nasty troll ... and YOU are the liar.
And you can't fall back on your infamous "fair competition" exception to Natural Law, because you defined "fair" as meaning "not using any method to harm others." Fossil fuels provably harm others, therefore fails the "fair" clause.
so ... enforcement of Natural Law means no more use of fossil fuels. Doesn't matter who wants or doesn't want that, it is Libertarian Natural Law policy ... if they have any integrity. LOL
You even hint at this in your statement that Trudeau's carbon tax is a sensible thing ... merely a step in the right direction in the Libertarian policy to eliminate fossil fuels entirely ... again, if they have any integrity.
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Thursday, 31st October, 2024, 02:35 AM.
You hint in your statement that Trudeau's carbon tax is a sensible thing ... a step in the right direction in the Libertarian policy to eliminate fossil fuels entirely
An outright admission that a LIbertarian Natural Law elected government will, in its jurisdiction, TOTALLY ELIMINATE BY FORCE all fossil fuel use on the basis of Natural Law.
Dilip hasn't wanted to confess to this, but I managed to get him to unwittingly admit it.
Nice post with greater elaboration.....there are a number of your statements that I agree with.......I'll specify, since I fundamentally don't accept your "Soul Plan/Suffering" Theology, but wish to get your package right.
I'm playing a weekend chess tournament this weekend, out of Toronto.
I'll respond some time next week.......I find our discussion of your theology most interesting......from lack of comments, except Dilip's somewhat rote atheist responses, though, I'm not sure any other CT'ers care....there comes hence only "crickets" (= silence).
Bob A (Theist)
Hey Bob A, I just watched this video explaining much better than I did the soul planning process ... its about 31 minutes long and chock full of information.
'If there is no heaven, what is the point of existing at all?'
This is the notion which makes one believe in all sorts of baseless theories imagining a Heaven high up in the sky or somewhere.
However, as the this guy on Quora Digest explains, there is another way, in which you remain firmly grounded in reality and yet be contented: Scott Welch
·
Follow
I exist. One day I won't.Updated 1y
Tweet
Comment