*Author

Offline Nepycros

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2571
  • Reputation Power: 32
  • Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.
  • My creativity was OP, so I had to nerf it.
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #12 on: February 06, 2011, 01:45:06 am »
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Perception is the source of misunderstanding.

Why, yes. I do have a Mindgate necklace. It's how I ninja everyone.

Offline ZephyrPhantom

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7675
  • Country: aq
  • Reputation Power: 101
  • ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.ZephyrPhantom is a mythical and divine giver of immortality, one of the Turquoise Nymphs.
  • Awards: Slice of Elements 6th Birthday CakeSlice of Elements 4th Birthday CakeFlavour Text Revival Competition - WinnerSlice of Elements 3rd Birthday CakeSlice of Elements 2nd Birthday Cake
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #13 on: February 06, 2011, 01:48:15 am »
Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 

Offline jmdt

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2782
  • Reputation Power: 33
  • jmdt is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.jmdt is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.jmdt is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.jmdt is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.jmdt is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.jmdt is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.
  • New to Elements
  • Awards: Slice of Elements 10th Birthday Cake
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #14 on: February 06, 2011, 01:59:52 am »
Also, you know what Counter Strike needs? Aliens. And weapons that shoot laser beams.



Seriously. Don't touch the core of a game.
+1

If I want lasers and shields, I play Halo.  If I'm in a realistic mood its time for CoD.

Offline chum3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 287
  • Reputation Power: 4
  • chum3 is a Spark waiting for a buff.
  • New to Elements
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #15 on: February 06, 2011, 02:10:46 am »
And the Oracle would have to be redone to include a 13th star sign.
Well then, I guess it's the perfect time to add that Ophiuchus sign that caused all that hooplah a few weeks ago (in the U.S., at least).

Also, you know what Counter Strike needs? Aliens. And weapons that shoot laser beams.
Didn't they add aliens to Indiana Jones (I didn't watch the fourth one)? Not that it was a realistic series to begin with, but they didn't need to add aliens.

In all seriousness, adding a new element would be a bit much for the game.

Offline Bloodshadow

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4030
  • Country: ca
  • Reputation Power: 46
  • Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.
  • 吞天纳地,魔渡众生。天下万物,唯我至尊。
  • Awards: Ultimate Profile WinnerOpposites Attract
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2011, 02:15:57 am »
Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
To be or not to be, I can do both at once. Go learn quantum mechanics, n00b.

Offline Kamietsu

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3228
  • Country: us
  • Reputation Power: 47
  • Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.
  • Old to Elements
  • Awards: Spell Art Competition WinnerWinner of the MASH-UP CompetitionFunny Card Competition WinnerWinner of
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2011, 02:18:45 am »
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
╔╦╦═╦══╦╗  ( ̄ー ̄) --Snorlax says:
║═╣╬║║║║║    Eat your shower, brush your toothpaste, take your teeth.
╚╩╩╩╩╩╩╩╝

Offline Nepycros

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2571
  • Reputation Power: 32
  • Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.
  • My creativity was OP, so I had to nerf it.
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2011, 02:24:31 am »
But only to the extent of its own knowledge. By your reasoning, the human mind is inherently omnipotent and efficient enough that it knows how to react in all situations. That means the terms like 'trial and error' don't exist. That is not the case. Humans and animals alike will always react differently in the hill-rolling experiment, because they are continually trying to find new ways to cope with a situation. We are constantly taking in data, yes, but due to the amount of data we WANT to collect, that influences us to change our actions whenever in the same situation.

In short, we will always be different because of our free will, and that free will is the concept that we CAN get better. You view us as machines, but in reality, we carry empathy, anger, lust, joy, and all the things that throw new variables into the world.

And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
In order:

I said "solid matter" which encompasses all gases, solids, and liquids. Gravity does not exist without matter. That much is true. Gravity isn't a rogue energy in the universe. It depends entirely on the mass of a substantial object.

Death cannot exist without Life. You can't say something is dead if it hadn't been alive before. Inanimate objects are not dead, since they were never alive in the first place.

If something thinks, then that means that it simply tries to solve problems using a formula. No matter what, a robot is not considered alive. I, Robot is an invalid example, in my opinion.
Perception is the source of misunderstanding.

Why, yes. I do have a Mindgate necklace. It's how I ninja everyone.

Offline Kamietsu

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3228
  • Country: us
  • Reputation Power: 47
  • Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.
  • Old to Elements
  • Awards: Spell Art Competition WinnerWinner of the MASH-UP CompetitionFunny Card Competition WinnerWinner of
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2011, 02:33:56 am »
But only to the extent of its own knowledge. By your reasoning, the human mind is inherently omnipotent and efficient enough that it knows how to react in all situations. That means the terms like 'trial and error' don't exist. That is not the case. Humans and animals alike will always react differently in the hill-rolling experiment, because they are continually trying to find new ways to cope with a situation. We are constantly taking in data, yes, but due to the amount of data we WANT to collect, that influences us to change our actions whenever in the same situation.

In short, we will always be different because of our free will, and that free will is the concept that we CAN get better. You view us as machines, but in reality, we carry empathy, anger, lust, joy, and all the things that throw new variables into the world.

And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
In order:

I said "solid matter" which encompasses all gases, solids, and liquids. Gravity does not exist without matter. That much is true. Gravity isn't a rogue energy in the universe. It depends entirely on the mass of a substantial object.

Death cannot exist without Life. You can't say something is dead if it hadn't been alive before. Inanimate objects are not dead, since they were never alive in the first place.

If something thinks, then that means that it simply tries to solve problems using a formula. No matter what, a robot is not considered alive. I, Robot is an invalid example, in my opinion.

Well you just added a bunch of stuff to what I said that came out of no where. How dod you get that I only think of humans as a machine? Where did your entire first two paragraphs come from?

Solid matter does not encompass all gases, solids and liquids because those three things are different states of matter. Solid matters refers to solid things, not to gases, liquids, or plasmas.

I think therefore I am. If a computer has artificial intelligence, what is truly stopping it from being alive? A heart? Blood? Emotions? Well, if it is truly AI, then emotions wouldn't be a problem. Emotions are a part of what makes us intelligent beings. It almost makes us complete idiots at times, but that's neither here nor there.

Thinking does not only mean it is trying to solve a problem using a formula. And by whose definition is a robot never alive? Yours? Because that's the only way i can see you saying that. Just because something doesn't agree with your own personal definition, doesn't mean it's false.

a·live
   /əˈlaɪv/ Show Spelled[uh-lahyv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having life; living;  existing; not dead or lifeless.
2.
living  (used for emphasis): the proudest man alive.
3.
in a state of action; in force or operation; active: to keep hope alive.
4.
full of energy and spirit; lively: Grandmother's more alive than most of her contemporaries.
5.
having the quality of life; vivid; vibrant: The room was alive with color.
6.
Electricity . live2 ( def. 17 ) .


I see nothing in the dictionary definition of 'alive' that contradicts a robot being a live. Minus the spirit part because that is not measurable in any way as of yet.
╔╦╦═╦══╦╗  ( ̄ー ̄) --Snorlax says:
║═╣╬║║║║║    Eat your shower, brush your toothpaste, take your teeth.
╚╩╩╩╩╩╩╩╝

Offline Nepycros

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2571
  • Reputation Power: 32
  • Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.
  • My creativity was OP, so I had to nerf it.
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2011, 02:47:54 am »
But only to the extent of its own knowledge. By your reasoning, the human mind is inherently omnipotent and efficient enough that it knows how to react in all situations. That means the terms like 'trial and error' don't exist. That is not the case. Humans and animals alike will always react differently in the hill-rolling experiment, because they are continually trying to find new ways to cope with a situation. We are constantly taking in data, yes, but due to the amount of data we WANT to collect, that influences us to change our actions whenever in the same situation.

In short, we will always be different because of our free will, and that free will is the concept that we CAN get better. You view us as machines, but in reality, we carry empathy, anger, lust, joy, and all the things that throw new variables into the world.

And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
In order:

I said "solid matter" which encompasses all gases, solids, and liquids. Gravity does not exist without matter. That much is true. Gravity isn't a rogue energy in the universe. It depends entirely on the mass of a substantial object.

Death cannot exist without Life. You can't say something is dead if it hadn't been alive before. Inanimate objects are not dead, since they were never alive in the first place.

If something thinks, then that means that it simply tries to solve problems using a formula. No matter what, a robot is not considered alive. I, Robot is an invalid example, in my opinion.

Well you just added a bunch of stuff to what I said that came out of no where. How dod you get that I only think of humans as a machine? Where did your entire first two paragraphs come from?

Solid matter does not encompass all gases, solids and liquids because those three things are different states of matter. Solid matters refers to solid things, not to gases, liquids, or plasmas.

I think therefore I am. If a computer has artificial intelligence, what is truly stopping it from being alive? A heart? Blood? Emotions? Well, if it is truly AI, then emotions wouldn't be a problem. Emotions are a part of what makes us intelligent beings. It almost makes us complete idiots at times, but that's neither here nor there.

Thinking does not only mean it is trying to solve a problem using a formula. And by whose definition is a robot never alive? Yours? Because that's the only way i can see you saying that. Just because something doesn't agree with your own personal definition, doesn't mean it's false.

a·live
   /əˈlaɪv/ Show Spelled[uh-lahyv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having life; living;  existing; not dead or lifeless.
2.
living  (used for emphasis): the proudest man alive.
3.
in a state of action; in force or operation; active: to keep hope alive.
4.
full of energy and spirit; lively: Grandmother's more alive than most of her contemporaries.
5.
having the quality of life; vivid; vibrant: The room was alive with color.
6.
Electricity . live2 ( def. 17 ) .


I see nothing in the dictionary definition of 'alive' that contradicts a robot being a live. Minus the spirit part because that is not measurable in any way as of yet.
I used the Human vs. Machine idea because you said that consciousness and free will does not exist, and those are the lacking features of a machine. We have free will, and I can't understand why that was said.

An AI can't be alive, because it doesn't think for itself. It just runs some numbers, and reacts in the way it was programmed too. If you gave an AI all of a person's memories, it would react to a situation based on what it interpreted in the person's memories. It contains no impulses, no thought that it hadn't engineered itself, and it's not alive, because yes, it doesn't have any organic components, and lacks the properties of a living creature. We're operating under the idea that Life means it has a beating heart, body cells that die and reproduce, and the ability to influence the world around it to a degree, without having been manipulated itself in the action. We are fickle. A machine is not fickle. If you program a machine to be fickle, you are simply trying to create an emulation of a human being, a "carbon-copy" of something that is alive.

By "solid matter" I mean anything that contains mass. That means every atomic structure in the universe. Is that in-depth enough?

The fact you just said that "although something may not agree with you, it's not always false" is proof of my argument that AI's are alive, because when you program an AI, you are going to program it to either agree or disagree with you, and from there, build an opinion (granted, that is what we humans do, but that's neither here nor there). Things that are alive GROW and DIE. No middle ground.

A robot is not alive, because unless you've found a metal that is seemingly organic, and the organic matter contains sentient matter that it has achieved through evolution, or other celestial methods, it is not alive.
Perception is the source of misunderstanding.

Why, yes. I do have a Mindgate necklace. It's how I ninja everyone.

Offline Kamietsu

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3228
  • Country: us
  • Reputation Power: 47
  • Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Kamietsu is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.
  • Old to Elements
  • Awards: Spell Art Competition WinnerWinner of the MASH-UP CompetitionFunny Card Competition WinnerWinner of
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2011, 02:55:22 am »
But only to the extent of its own knowledge. By your reasoning, the human mind is inherently omnipotent and efficient enough that it knows how to react in all situations. That means the terms like 'trial and error' don't exist. That is not the case. Humans and animals alike will always react differently in the hill-rolling experiment, because they are continually trying to find new ways to cope with a situation. We are constantly taking in data, yes, but due to the amount of data we WANT to collect, that influences us to change our actions whenever in the same situation.

In short, we will always be different because of our free will, and that free will is the concept that we CAN get better. You view us as machines, but in reality, we carry empathy, anger, lust, joy, and all the things that throw new variables into the world.

And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
In order:

I said "solid matter" which encompasses all gases, solids, and liquids. Gravity does not exist without matter. That much is true. Gravity isn't a rogue energy in the universe. It depends entirely on the mass of a substantial object.

Death cannot exist without Life. You can't say something is dead if it hadn't been alive before. Inanimate objects are not dead, since they were never alive in the first place.

If something thinks, then that means that it simply tries to solve problems using a formula. No matter what, a robot is not considered alive. I, Robot is an invalid example, in my opinion.

Well you just added a bunch of stuff to what I said that came out of no where. How dod you get that I only think of humans as a machine? Where did your entire first two paragraphs come from?

Solid matter does not encompass all gases, solids and liquids because those three things are different states of matter. Solid matters refers to solid things, not to gases, liquids, or plasmas.

I think therefore I am. If a computer has artificial intelligence, what is truly stopping it from being alive? A heart? Blood? Emotions? Well, if it is truly AI, then emotions wouldn't be a problem. Emotions are a part of what makes us intelligent beings. It almost makes us complete idiots at times, but that's neither here nor there.

Thinking does not only mean it is trying to solve a problem using a formula. And by whose definition is a robot never alive? Yours? Because that's the only way i can see you saying that. Just because something doesn't agree with your own personal definition, doesn't mean it's false.

a·live
   /əˈlaɪv/ Show Spelled[uh-lahyv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having life; living;  existing; not dead or lifeless.
2.
living  (used for emphasis): the proudest man alive.
3.
in a state of action; in force or operation; active: to keep hope alive.
4.
full of energy and spirit; lively: Grandmother's more alive than most of her contemporaries.
5.
having the quality of life; vivid; vibrant: The room was alive with color.
6.
Electricity . live2 ( def. 17 ) .


I see nothing in the dictionary definition of 'alive' that contradicts a robot being a live. Minus the spirit part because that is not measurable in any way as of yet.
I used the Human vs. Machine idea because you said that consciousness and free will does not exist, and those are the lacking features of a machine. We have free will, and I can't understand why that was said.

An AI can't be alive, because it doesn't think for itself. It just runs some numbers, and reacts in the way it was programmed too. If you gave an AI all of a person's memories, it would react to a situation based on what it interpreted in the person's memories. It contains no impulses, no thought that it hadn't engineered itself, and it's not alive, because yes, it doesn't have any organic components, and lacks the properties of a living creature. We're operating under the idea that Life means it has a beating heart, body cells that die and reproduce, and the ability to influence the world around it to a degree, without having been manipulated itself in the action. We are fickle. A machine is not fickle. If you program a machine to be fickle, you are simply trying to create an emulation of a human being, a "carbon-copy" of something that is alive.

By "solid matter" I mean anything that contains mass. That means every atomic structure in the universe. Is that in-depth enough?

The fact you just said that "although something may not agree with you, it's not always false" is proof of my argument that AI's are alive, because when you program an AI, you are going to program it to either agree or disagree with you, and from there, build an opinion (granted, that is what we humans do, but that's neither here nor there). Things that are alive GROW and DIE. No middle ground.

A robot is not alive, because unless you've found a metal that is seemingly organic, and the organic matter contains sentient matter that it has achieved through evolution, or other celestial methods, it is not alive.

Where did I say free will and consciousness do not exist? I think you are putting words under my fingers.

Artificial intelligence as it exists now is how you describe it. But that's not true AI. True AI thinks for itself, it grows in terms of consciousness, and even a robot cannot survive forever therefor it will eventually cease to exist.

Well, solid matter and anything containing mass are not the same thing at all. Just because it has mass does not mean it is a solid.

And you are using your own definition again to define what is alive. I don't remember seeing anything having to be organic to be alive in the definition.
╔╦╦═╦══╦╗  ( ̄ー ̄) --Snorlax says:
║═╣╬║║║║║    Eat your shower, brush your toothpaste, take your teeth.
╚╩╩╩╩╩╩╩╝

Offline Nepycros

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2571
  • Reputation Power: 32
  • Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.Nepycros is a Ghost, obsessed with their Elemental pursuits.
  • My creativity was OP, so I had to nerf it.
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2011, 03:08:29 am »
But only to the extent of its own knowledge. By your reasoning, the human mind is inherently omnipotent and efficient enough that it knows how to react in all situations. That means the terms like 'trial and error' don't exist. That is not the case. Humans and animals alike will always react differently in the hill-rolling experiment, because they are continually trying to find new ways to cope with a situation. We are constantly taking in data, yes, but due to the amount of data we WANT to collect, that influences us to change our actions whenever in the same situation.

In short, we will always be different because of our free will, and that free will is the concept that we CAN get better. You view us as machines, but in reality, we carry empathy, anger, lust, joy, and all the things that throw new variables into the world.

And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
I do not find Earth as an all encompassing solid matter. Such as Jupiter is a gas giant, yet has a plenty of gravity yet no solid surface. Gravity exists without Earth.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
And without Earth (solid matter), there's no Gravity. I could do this all day.
Ninja ninja is not amused.

Kamietsu, one could argue that every element is some present or related to another one, so that argument is invalid. 
I don't fully see how. All of the elements can exist on their own, and anything else can be grouped into one of the twelve elements somehow.

Well, whether you acknowledge it or not,  :life is still the main support for thought. Without life, there is nothing to think, no thoughts to be formed.
Actually, no. You can have non-carbon-based life. Even artificial intelligences count as sentient thought.

Personally, I put mind and psychic powers into :light :darkness :life :death. Unlike :fire :water :earth :air, which are related to physical matter, and :time :aether :gravity :entropy, which are related to the fabric of reality, :light :darkness :life :death are esoteric concepts that are only meaningful to sentient beings. See this thread for more details: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,20457.0.html

Also, Nepycros, in the real world consciousness and free will does not exist. If you roll a person down a hill, he'll react in the same way every time. The human brain is simply a machine that interprets data and makes judgments; it will always respond in the way that is the most beneficial to the person.
If one thinks, is it not alive in some way?
In order:

I said "solid matter" which encompasses all gases, solids, and liquids. Gravity does not exist without matter. That much is true. Gravity isn't a rogue energy in the universe. It depends entirely on the mass of a substantial object.

Death cannot exist without Life. You can't say something is dead if it hadn't been alive before. Inanimate objects are not dead, since they were never alive in the first place.

If something thinks, then that means that it simply tries to solve problems using a formula. No matter what, a robot is not considered alive. I, Robot is an invalid example, in my opinion.

Well you just added a bunch of stuff to what I said that came out of no where. How dod you get that I only think of humans as a machine? Where did your entire first two paragraphs come from?

Solid matter does not encompass all gases, solids and liquids because those three things are different states of matter. Solid matters refers to solid things, not to gases, liquids, or plasmas.

I think therefore I am. If a computer has artificial intelligence, what is truly stopping it from being alive? A heart? Blood? Emotions? Well, if it is truly AI, then emotions wouldn't be a problem. Emotions are a part of what makes us intelligent beings. It almost makes us complete idiots at times, but that's neither here nor there.

Thinking does not only mean it is trying to solve a problem using a formula. And by whose definition is a robot never alive? Yours? Because that's the only way i can see you saying that. Just because something doesn't agree with your own personal definition, doesn't mean it's false.

a·live
   /əˈlaɪv/ Show Spelled[uh-lahyv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having life; living;  existing; not dead or lifeless.
2.
living  (used for emphasis): the proudest man alive.
3.
in a state of action; in force or operation; active: to keep hope alive.
4.
full of energy and spirit; lively: Grandmother's more alive than most of her contemporaries.
5.
having the quality of life; vivid; vibrant: The room was alive with color.
6.
Electricity . live2 ( def. 17 ) .


I see nothing in the dictionary definition of 'alive' that contradicts a robot being a live. Minus the spirit part because that is not measurable in any way as of yet.
I used the Human vs. Machine idea because you said that consciousness and free will does not exist, and those are the lacking features of a machine. We have free will, and I can't understand why that was said.

An AI can't be alive, because it doesn't think for itself. It just runs some numbers, and reacts in the way it was programmed too. If you gave an AI all of a person's memories, it would react to a situation based on what it interpreted in the person's memories. It contains no impulses, no thought that it hadn't engineered itself, and it's not alive, because yes, it doesn't have any organic components, and lacks the properties of a living creature. We're operating under the idea that Life means it has a beating heart, body cells that die and reproduce, and the ability to influence the world around it to a degree, without having been manipulated itself in the action. We are fickle. A machine is not fickle. If you program a machine to be fickle, you are simply trying to create an emulation of a human being, a "carbon-copy" of something that is alive.

By "solid matter" I mean anything that contains mass. That means every atomic structure in the universe. Is that in-depth enough?

The fact you just said that "although something may not agree with you, it's not always false" is proof of my argument that AI's are alive, because when you program an AI, you are going to program it to either agree or disagree with you, and from there, build an opinion (granted, that is what we humans do, but that's neither here nor there). Things that are alive GROW and DIE. No middle ground.

A robot is not alive, because unless you've found a metal that is seemingly organic, and the organic matter contains sentient matter that it has achieved through evolution, or other celestial methods, it is not alive.

Where did I say free will and consciousness do not exist? I think you are putting words under my fingers.

Artificial intelligence as it exists now is how you describe it. But that's not true AI. True AI thinks for itself, it grows in terms of consciousness, and even a robot cannot survive forever therefor it will eventually cease to exist.

Well, solid matter and anything containing mass are not the same thing at all. Just because it has mass does not mean it is a solid.

And you are using your own definition again to define what is alive. I don't remember seeing anything having to be organic to be alive in the definition.
Sorry. BloodShadow said that. When something is said, I often don't really consider WHO said it. I should direct that at him instead. By looking back, I saw who really said that, so I will correct myself now.

A true Artificial Intelligence that you speak of would have all the qualities of a living person... except for one thing. No matter what you say can happen in the future, noone can change the fact that machines that take knowledge from sources and store them in a memory run on binary. Do you think in 0's and 1's? If we can make machines think otherwise, then maybe we will create something that COULD be called alive. But know this: it has never evolved, it has never gained adaptations because of natural selection, it does not reproduce without taking in other metals of its exact composition in order to create a copy of itself (we humans take in all sorts of different forms of matter to eventually create a creature made of carbon and calcium), and it does not carry organic compositions. That is why I don't think it's alive. But I suppose it could carry the compositions of said Life.

Solid matter and anything containing mass aren't as different as you think, but I kick myself for not making myself clear. Solid matter is anything containing mass. Atoms are solid, molecules are solid, etc. Water is solid, in my opinion, because I consider the definition of solid to be something that carries substance and mass. I will not make the same mistake again. I will now refer to mass and all forms of matter.

Something that isn't organic lacks a quality: Growth. We can engineer robotic growth, but it's basically just a science fair project. All you're doing is causing something to convert compounds into mass that it assimilates into its own overall mass. Again, a copy of humans.

If you can create a machine that copies all the qualities of a living creature, then I will consider it alive. But that won't be for awhile, and I'm not convinced it's even possible.
Perception is the source of misunderstanding.

Why, yes. I do have a Mindgate necklace. It's how I ninja everyone.

Offline Bloodshadow

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4030
  • Country: ca
  • Reputation Power: 46
  • Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.Bloodshadow is towering like an Amethyst Dragon over their peers.
  • 吞天纳地,魔渡众生。天下万物,唯我至尊。
  • Awards: Ultimate Profile WinnerOpposites Attract
Re: Theory of a New Element (Semi-Permalink)
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2011, 04:13:27 am »
Quote
Something that isn't organic lacks a quality: Growth.
You do realize that organic growth is simply taking and arranging carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen atoms into the compounds that make up your body, right? Matter cannot be created from nothing, so in the real world there is no true "growth". It doesn't matter if you're a carbon-based organic creature or metal-based robotic creature, you're still assimilating matter and arranging them to match you.

Quote
No matter what you say can happen in the future, noone can change the fact that machines that take knowledge from sources and store them in a memory run on binary.
And how is this different from humans? A human takes knowledge from his surroundings and past experiences. He stores that knowledge into his memories. The fact that computers think in binary is completely trivial, since binary is only one of the ways to use electricity to transmit information; it's not really that different from the neuro-electrical signals of the human brain.

If an artificial intelligence is complex enough to modify its own behavioral patterns based on the inputs it received in the past, then it really isn't all that different from a human mind. And if that AI constructs a body that can modify and replicate itself by assimilating matter from outside sources, then for all intents and purposes it is alive.

Quote
We have free will, and I can't understand why that was said.
No, we don't. The human brain is nothing but an arrangement of protons, neutrons, and electrons. It is a machine, and its components move in patterns governed by electromagnetic force. We cannot "choose" to do something; instead, we only do things when there are reasons to do these things. For example, you ate because you need food to survive, you chose the hamburger over the sandwich because you think hamburgers taste better, you gave money to the homeless man because it brings you pleasure to help others, etc. The very notion of free will defies logic and reason, because it suggests that a person can "choose" to do something for no reason. When there is a reason for us to do something, we are forced to do it; we cannot "choose" not to, by the definition of free will.
To be or not to be, I can do both at once. Go learn quantum mechanics, n00b.

 

blarg: