| Author | Message | ||
Junior_no1 Megastar Username: Junior_no1 Post Number: 23228 Registered: 09-2014 Posted From: 223.182.47.96 Rating: |
Nippon dance sesthundu  Lo.Ba the new sensation in AP | ||
Theaviator Side Hero Username: Theaviator Post Number: 2513 Registered: 07-2014 Posted From: 183.82.42.130 Rating: |
ivala jebulo cbn photo pettukoledanuka.. topic edaina, jagga padayatra lo paid avva entry laga gaali lo cheyyi oopukunta vachestadu | ||
Junior_no1 Megastar Username: Junior_no1 Post Number: 23224 Registered: 09-2014 Posted From: 223.182.47.96 Rating: N/A |
Show CBN aka nippu,andulo Anni vuntayi Lo.Ba the new sensation in AP | ||
Doraveerachakra Side Hero Username: Doraveerachakra Post Number: 5533 Registered: 11-2010 Posted From: 82.3.170.250 Rating: N/A |
Qunatum physics vaalla baamma parri lo vuntaayi vethikithey  | ||
Nisarga Comedian Username: Nisarga Post Number: 1117 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 175.101.63.13 Rating: N/A |
Yeliezer Yudkowsky's Making Beliefs Pay Rent (in Anticipated Experiences) argument: Thus begins the ancient parable: If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound? One says, "Yes it does, for it makes vibrations in the air." Another says, "No it does not, for there is no auditory processing in any brain." Suppose that, after the tree falls, the two walk into the forest together. Will one expect to see the tree fallen to the right, and the other expect to see the tree fallen to the left? Suppose that before the tree falls, the two leave a sound recorder next to the tree. Would one, playing back the recorder, expect to hear something different from the other? Suppose they attach an electroencephalograph to any brain in the world; would one expect to see a different trace than the other? Though the two argue, one saying "No," and the other saying "Yes," they do not anticipate any different experiences. The two think they have different models of the world, but they have no difference with respect to what they expect will happen to them. It's tempting to try to eliminate this mistake class by insisting that the only legitimate kind of belief is an anticipation of sensory experience. But the world does, in fact, contain much that is not sensed directly. We don't see the atoms underlying the brick, but the atoms are in fact there. There is a floor beneath your feet, but you don't experience the floor directly; you see the light reflected from the floor, or rather, you see what your retina and visual cortex have processed of that light. To infer the floor from seeing the floor is to step back into the unseen causes of experience. It may seem like a very short and direct step, but it is still a step. You stand on top of a tall building, next to a grandfather clock with an hour, minute, and ticking second hand. In your hand is a bowling ball, and you drop it off the roof. On which tick of the clock will you hear the crash of the bowling ball hitting the ground? To answer precisely, you must use beliefs like Earth's gravity is 9.8 meters per second per second, and This building is around 120 meters tall. These beliefs are not wordless anticipations of a sensory experience; they are verbal-ish, propositional. It probably does not exaggerate much to describe these two beliefs as sentences made out of words. But these two beliefs have an inferential consequence that is a direct sensory anticipation—if the clock's second hand is on the 12 numeral when you drop the ball, you anticipate seeing it on the 1 numeral when you hear the crash five seconds later. To anticipate sensory experiences as precisely as possible, we must process beliefs that are not anticipations of sensory experience. It is a great strength of Homo sapiens that we can, better than any other species in the world, learn to model the unseen. It is also one of our great weak points. Humans often believe in things that are not only unseen but unreal. The same brain that builds a network of inferred causes behind sensory experience, can also build a network of causes that is not connected to sensory experience, or poorly connected. Alchemists believed that phlogiston caused fire—we could oversimply their minds by drawing a little node labeled "Phlogiston", and an arrow from this node to their sensory experience of a crackling campfire—but this belief yielded no advance predictions; the link from phlogiston to experience was always configured after the experience, rather than constraining the experience in advance. Or suppose your postmodern English professor teaches you that the famous writer Wulky Wilkinsen is actually a "post-utopian". What does this mean you should expect from his books? Nothing. The belief, if you can call it that, doesn't connect to sensory experience at all. But you had better remember the propositional assertion that "Wulky Wilkinsen" has the "post-utopian" attribute, so you can regurgitate it on the upcoming quiz. Likewise if "post-utopians" show "colonial alienation"; if the quiz asks whether Wulky Wilkinsen shows colonial alienation, you'd better answer yes. The beliefs are connected to each other, though still not connected to any anticipated experience. We can build up whole networks of beliefs that are connected only to each other—call these "floating" beliefs. It is a uniquely human flaw among animal species, a perversion of Homo sapiens's ability to build more general and flexible belief networks. The rationalist virtue of empiricism consists of constantly asking which experiences our beliefs predict—or better yet, prohibit. Do you believe that phlogiston is the cause of fire? Then what do you expect to see happen, because of that? Do you believe that Wulky Wilkinsen is a post-utopian? Then what do you expect to see because of that? No, not "colonial alienation"; what experience will happen to you? Do you believe that if a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it, it still makes a sound? Then what experience must therefore befall you? It is even better to ask: what experience must not happen to you? Do you believe that elan vital explains the mysterious aliveness of living beings? Then what does this belief not allow to happen—what would definitely falsify this belief? A null answer means that your belief does not constrain experience; it permits anything to happen to you. It floats. When you argue a seemingly factual question, always keep in mind which difference of anticipation you are arguing about. If you can't find the difference of anticipation, you're probably arguing about labels in your belief network—or even worse, floating beliefs, barnacles on your network. If you don't know what experiences are implied by Wulky Wilkinsen being a post-utopian, you can go on arguing forever. (You can also publish papers forever.) Above all, don't ask what to believe—ask what to anticipate. Every question of belief should flow from a question of anticipation, and that question of anticipation should be the center of the inquiry. Every guess of belief should begin by flowing to a specific guess of anticipation, and should continue to pay rent in future anticipations. If a belief turns deadbeat, evict it. | ||
Nisarga Comedian Username: Nisarga Post Number: 1116 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 175.101.63.13 Rating: |
Carl Sagan Dragon the Garage story fro less wrong: Carl Sagan once told a parable of a man who comes to us and claims: "There is a dragon in my garage." Fascinating! We reply that we wish to see this dragon—let us set out at once for the garage! "But wait," the claimant says to us, "it is an invisible dragon." Now as Sagan points out, this doesn't make the hypothesis unfalsifiable. Perhaps we go to the claimant's garage, and although we see no dragon, we hear heavy breathing from no visible source; footprints mysteriously appear on the ground; and instruments show that something in the garage is consuming oxygen and breathing out carbon dioxide. But now suppose that we say to the claimant, "Okay, we'll visit the garage and see if we can hear heavy breathing," and the claimant quickly says no, it's an inaudible dragon. We propose to measure carbon dioxide in the air, and the claimant says the dragon does not breathe. We propose to toss a bag of flour into the air to see if it outlines an invisible dragon, and the claimant immediately says, "The dragon is permeable to flour." Carl Sagan used this parable to illustrate the classic moral that poor hypotheses need to do fast footwork to avoid falsification. But I tell this parable to make a different point: The claimant must have an accurate model of the situation somewhere in his mind, because he can anticipate, in advance, exactly which experimental results he'll need to excuse... | ||
Thokkalohdi Hero Username: Thokkalohdi Post Number: 13770 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 24.5.236.139 Rating: N/A |
Exactly NGO paid artist no. 10,00,000 ayna Gogineni is saying "india lo open debate and scientific research ki scope ledu". Such a wrong statement... IITs, Central university lanti educational institutions... CCMB, NIN, DRDO, MiDhaNi etc lanti research facilities anni Core sciences ki devote ayyi unnayi... ~10 years back Osmania University lo M.A Astrology introduce chestham antey ee sadaru rationalists chesina hungama intha anta kaadu.... finally it started. Ma sontha family lo retire ayna peddalu 2 join ayyaru.. thesis kinda ma motham cousins history tesukuni study chesi.. future lo certain specific events ni predict chesaru... 9/10 were correct... one or two predictions were ridiculous i mean no one will predict it and they were all correct. | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7735 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
Yeah, but problem is no one is studying Astrology Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Thokkalohdi Hero Username: Thokkalohdi Post Number: 13769 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 24.5.236.139 Rating: N/A |
Jyothisyam anedi nalugu vedalalo lo bagam kaadu... so dani varuku kontha debate unna.... Kala gyanam aney concept varuku Jyothisham tho thakkuva sambandam undi... more with "global mind" concept. theory of realitivity laaga... in relation to 2017 konni vishayalu science ki navvulataga undochu.... for example "all elements came from single element" in 1890 is a laughing statement to "rationalists" in 2017 that is not a laughing statement anymore. Everything has to go through time. | ||
Teenmaar Side Hero Username: Teenmaar Post Number: 3840 Registered: 02-2011 Posted From: 71.114.121.37 Rating: N/A |
Its a picture of hydrogen atom.. You can not take picture of electron, because they constantly move and no cannon camera can stop them to take picture. even with super fast camera All you see is a passing cloud. | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7734 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
listening... Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7733 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
Emitidi edo heat map la undi? Electron/Neutron/proton shapes enti? round ga spherical shape ani chopincheru kada? ante cheppindi anta wrong na? Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Thokkalohdi Hero Username: Thokkalohdi Post Number: 13768 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 24.5.236.139 Rating: N/A |
no problem... but you can still listen to Dr. TGK Krishna Murthy in IIT Kharagpur lecture on Swami Vivvekananda and Modern Science... and you will find enough debatable topics to shut these pseudo rationalists who are agenda based. | ||
Thokkalohdi Hero Username: Thokkalohdi Post Number: 13767 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 24.5.236.139 Rating: N/A |
Some examples: Swamiji through his medidation, vedic knowledge and realization talked about concepts like "global mind" "symbiotic relationships" "involution and manifestation". He talked about them in 1890s.. and today in 2000s people are getting Nobel prizes based on those concepts (not from him.. but through their research). | ||
Teenmaar Side Hero Username: Teenmaar Post Number: 3839 Registered: 02-2011 Posted From: 71.114.121.37 Rating: N/A |
https://wordlesstech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Quantum- Microscope-sees-the-Hydrogen-Atom-for-the-first-time-1-640x4 55.jpg | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7731 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: |
No love towards nikkar batch... Rationalist ani cheppukoni artham kanivi anni trash ante ne mandipota untadi... Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Thokkalohdi Hero Username: Thokkalohdi Post Number: 13766 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 24.5.236.139 Rating: N/A |
annai if you truly love nikkar batch... take time and listen to this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBATjUpEuJ4 Gogineni is not even a nail of Dr. TGK krishna murthy who is former director ISRO. And one of top scientists in his space in india. Gogineni is a living being on microphone. Real scientists who understand Unity of science dont care about what gogineni says. | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7730 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
Nope, dongalu dongale... Astrology astrology ne anta... Dont go on the premise that things not completely understood are trash... Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7729 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
What is the scientific proof for 'Love'? Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7728 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
Also there are lot schools of thought on spirituality/god... You can take what you want... Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Raman Legend Username: Raman Post Number: 54061 Registered: 01-2009 Posted From: 175.101.144.132 Rating: N/A |
babu gogineni ki parody thed aa waarini mental ekkistunnaruga | ||
Pullarao Junior Artist Username: Pullarao Post Number: 38 Registered: 03-2017 Posted From: 73.76.178.142 Rating: N/A |
 | ||
Uppu Hero Username: Uppu Post Number: 11104 Registered: 11-2007 Posted From: 73.158.204.186 Rating: N/A |
Ippudu Atom photo lekapote , donga jyotisham correct antara | ||
Thokkalohdi Hero Username: Thokkalohdi Post Number: 13765 Registered: 01-2008 Posted From: 24.5.236.139 Rating: N/A |
this thread if kept alive will go on for another 2000 years... with no ending... god and science will form unity one day. Vivekananda's words will not go fruitless... | ||
Heineken Side Hero Username: Heineken Post Number: 5263 Registered: 04-2009 Posted From: 152.208.24.229 Rating: N/A |
Sorry Sir make Gyanam Prasadinchandi please please please Dharmic Happiness | Poetic Justice | ||
Pullarao Junior Artist Username: Pullarao Post Number: 37 Registered: 03-2017 Posted From: 185.104.120.7 Rating: |
I don't know how some guys finished studies and doing engineering jobs. Sorry for my responses.  | ||
Nightfury Junior Artist Username: Nightfury Post Number: 122 Registered: 08-2017 Posted From: 220.227.48.213 Rating: N/A |
offtopic: can somebody show me Air/Heat/Cold please!! | ||
Happydays Side Hero Username: Happydays Post Number: 6582 Registered: 02-2015 Posted From: 98.195.57.10 Rating: |
mari books lo chadivindi enti..waste a? Chiru,Veturi,SPB,Ilayaraja,Jandhyala,Vamsi,K Viswanath,Sachin,Florida,Rohit Sharma | ||
Meghan Side Hero Username: Meghan Post Number: 3690 Registered: 03-2014 Posted From: 71.59.37.156 Rating: |
Schrodinger and Heisenberg Model is the current model that is more acceptable now. Science always talks about theories and never proclaim we are 100% true like religion. | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7727 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
Yes I do pray god when there is a hurricane, to reduce the probability of damage to my house/area/town/city etc... Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7726 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: N/A |
proton/neutrons in the center and electrons around them like what they say in books https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/09/149209-004-E4AA2D6 3.jpg Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Pullarao Junior Artist Username: Pullarao Post Number: 36 Registered: 03-2017 Posted From: 104.244.73.126 Rating: |
Lol. It's possible and done using Atomic force microscopes. Some images at https://singularityhub.com/2009/09/01/microscope-sees-molecu les-for-first-time/#sm.00001jofmkfnaf0t10njy34kgaqi5 Gerd Binnig Heinrich Rohrer earned 1986 Nobel Prize for Physics for inventing Atomic force microscopy. | ||
Meghan Side Hero Username: Meghan Post Number: 3688 Registered: 03-2014 Posted From: 71.59.37.156 Rating: |
https://youtu.be/ofp-OHIq6Wo Do some research before you challenge And finally based on your beliefs show me a photograph of the stones/ pictures that you worship everyday | ||
Meghan Side Hero Username: Meghan Post Number: 3687 Registered: 03-2014 Posted From: 71.59.37.156 Rating: N/A |
Everything you work on to feed yourself , enjoy electronics, take tablets is based on the same assumptions Your books did not talked any of those elements or diseases ..... I dare you to believe your books recite some thing scriptical when there is a hurricane or a mishap | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7725 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: |
Evado faltu gadochi protons/neutron center lo untai chuttu electrons tirugutuntai ante ela nammutarra bhai... Choopinchu ani proofs adagara? why these mooda nammakalu? Vi veri universum vivus vici | ||
Vishvak Side Hero Username: Vishvak Post Number: 7724 Registered: 01-2007 Posted From: 73.164.13.25 Rating: |
Till then shut your mouths and tear all these faltu atomic physics books... Unless you prove that atoms exist, by showing me photos all your beliefs are wrong and waste...  Vi veri universum vivus vici |
