Edward Woodward — the man with wood so good they named it thrice — has died. Depending on how old you are, you might remember him as Callan, the policeman in the (real) Wicker Man, the Equalizer, or old Tom in Hot Fuzz.
Experiments suggest that the brain knows what is coming several seconds before it actually happens.
Quantum computing takes a step forward with the development of the first fully-programmable 2-bit quantum computer. The eventual implications of quantum computing remain uncertain — back in 1822, looking at the Difference Engine, who could have ever anticipated Badgers Badgers Bagders?
A show to avoid like the plague
The Mandelbulb is an incredible exploration of fractal space.
Murdering journalists seems to be becoming standard business procedure in Mexico, sickeningly.
Re: “Experiments suggest that the brain knows what is coming several seconds before it actually happens.”
Not to be a party-poop, but: Nerve impulses travel from the foot to the brain in around 0.02 seconds. Sure, that’s far slower than the speed of light (that would take about 0.000000006 seconds to make the trip), but well within the limits of conscious simultaneity. Stating that “the delay should be noticable” is just an out and out lie; you’ve got sensory crosstalk (the acceleration of the leg, various tensions and sensations as you move the leg) and an extremely short delay. Furthermore, the impact of the foot at those speeds is quite slow, which stretches the sensory “impact” out quite a bit.
It’s a little like trying to measure a moose with a micrometer, and claiming that the moose is infinitely large because it never survives long enough to be measured fully.
Hi Ken. I agree, the nerve/sight supposed delay is pretty flimsy stuff. It’s also reasonably ridiculous to suggest that even if there were a cognitive delay, that it would have any evolutionary impact whatsoever in a creature our size. But the Radin and Bierman stuff is extremely interesting, and much harder to explain away, to my mind.
That’s absolutely true, but I keep getting stuck on that phrase “Assuming the data is being recorded and interpreted correctly,” and thinking that I’d sure like to see more of that experiment—the criteria that they use to define “an emotional response,” what the test procedures and protocols are, the measuring equipment, the raw data, and the results from a second identical experiment (or a refined one if there turns out to be a flaw or flaws in the setup). This is a pretty dang revolutionary claim—it seems to be that if there’s a several-second warning on emotionally charged events, we would have measured it long before now—and I’m very reluctant to get excited until the experiment and data are properly examined and replicated.
For those of you who think I’m being too persnickety about this, I got two words for you: Cold fusion. :)
Ghostwoods is the home of Tim Dedopulos, a British writer, editor, publisher and game designer with nearly 100 works to his name in areas ranging from vampire horror, through music and art, to games, puzzles and jokes.
GHOSTWOODS BOOKS
Great Novels at Great Prices
Counter-culture thriller
Post-modern horror
Tense science fiction
Powerful urban fantasy
Re: “Experiments suggest that the brain knows what is coming several seconds before it actually happens.”
Not to be a party-poop, but: Nerve impulses travel from the foot to the brain in around 0.02 seconds. Sure, that’s far slower than the speed of light (that would take about 0.000000006 seconds to make the trip), but well within the limits of conscious simultaneity. Stating that “the delay should be noticable” is just an out and out lie; you’ve got sensory crosstalk (the acceleration of the leg, various tensions and sensations as you move the leg) and an extremely short delay. Furthermore, the impact of the foot at those speeds is quite slow, which stretches the sensory “impact” out quite a bit.
It’s a little like trying to measure a moose with a micrometer, and claiming that the moose is infinitely large because it never survives long enough to be measured fully.
Hi Ken. I agree, the nerve/sight supposed delay is pretty flimsy stuff. It’s also reasonably ridiculous to suggest that even if there were a cognitive delay, that it would have any evolutionary impact whatsoever in a creature our size. But the Radin and Bierman stuff is extremely interesting, and much harder to explain away, to my mind.
That’s absolutely true, but I keep getting stuck on that phrase “Assuming the data is being recorded and interpreted correctly,” and thinking that I’d sure like to see more of that experiment—the criteria that they use to define “an emotional response,” what the test procedures and protocols are, the measuring equipment, the raw data, and the results from a second identical experiment (or a refined one if there turns out to be a flaw or flaws in the setup). This is a pretty dang revolutionary claim—it seems to be that if there’s a several-second warning on emotionally charged events, we would have measured it long before now—and I’m very reluctant to get excited until the experiment and data are properly examined and replicated.
For those of you who think I’m being too persnickety about this, I got two words for you: Cold fusion. :)