Comments on: Slowing Time http://www.hakiri.org/blog/slowing-time/ Hacker Lifestyle Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:35:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: someone http://www.hakiri.org/blog/slowing-time/comment-page-1/#comment-419 someone Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:54:49 +0000 http://www.hakiri.org/blog/slowing-time/#comment-419 This does not prove or even suggest that time speeds up or slows down. Even though they went through all the trouble of using a video camera and recording it, and then narrating over it to make it sound like they'd done all the research necessary, it comes down to common sense. The brain adjusts to the body as we age, and our grasp of time comes from the observance of things around us(the moon, the sun, animals, plants) in relation to the average rate we perceive things at, which can be directly tied to heart rate. Just like the rat, if we are used to a certain heart rate and are trained to watch hours pass by so we can adjust to the length of a minute, it makes it easier for our brains to meter when a minute has passed. If you adjust to a certain heart rate, then all of a sudden you are dropped from a skyscraper and your heart rate speeds up, blood will move through your body faster than normal causing the sample resolution of your observances to improve. This would help to explain why he was able to recognize changing numbers that he was previously unable to, but even the test was faulty in that it can't be discounted that the force of falling might have had an effect other than increasing the heart rate of the participant. Time has been shown to be directly effected by gravitational forces and this may be attributed to a particle's increased ease of motion when it is not competing with an alternate force (just a guess). However, falling from 12 stories would have no noticeable impact on time, and if he was wearing a watch it would still be well tuned after he landed. This does not prove or even suggest that time speeds up or slows down. Even though they went through all the trouble of using a video camera and recording it, and then narrating over it to make it sound like they’d done all the research necessary, it comes down to common sense.

The brain adjusts to the body as we age, and our grasp of time comes from the observance of things around us(the moon, the sun, animals, plants) in relation to the average rate we perceive things at, which can be directly tied to heart rate. Just like the rat, if we are used to a certain heart rate and are trained to watch hours pass by so we can adjust to the length of a minute, it makes it easier for our brains to meter when a minute has passed.

If you adjust to a certain heart rate, then all of a sudden you are dropped from a skyscraper and your heart rate speeds up, blood will move through your body faster than normal causing the sample resolution of your observances to improve. This would help to explain why he was able to recognize changing numbers that he was previously unable to, but even the test was faulty in that it can’t be discounted that the force of falling might have had an effect other than increasing the heart rate of the participant.

Time has been shown to be directly effected by gravitational forces and this may be attributed to a particle’s increased ease of motion when it is not competing with an alternate force (just a guess). However, falling from 12 stories would have no noticeable impact on time, and if he was wearing a watch it would still be well tuned after he landed.

]]> By: waqas http://www.hakiri.org/blog/slowing-time/comment-page-1/#comment-410 waqas Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:37:08 +0000 http://www.hakiri.org/blog/slowing-time/#comment-410 "People say that we use 10% of our brains" The brain is a neural net. We use 100% of it. It is more appropriate to say that we use it with 10% efficiency. Though it seems to me someone pulled this number out of a hat. I don't recall any way to estimate the efficiency of a neural net other than brute forcing it. And I doubt there's any scientific estimate about how much brain power we use. “People say that we use 10% of our brains”

The brain is a neural net. We use 100% of it. It is more appropriate to say that we use it with 10% efficiency. Though it seems to me someone pulled this number out of a hat. I don’t recall any way to estimate the efficiency of a neural net other than brute forcing it. And I doubt there’s any scientific estimate about how much brain power we use.

]]>