|
Diploid
Cuban



Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: Zanthius]
#17959426 - 03/15/13 08:24 AM (10 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
He wouldn't just get a million dollars. He would probably also get the Nobel prize in chemistry or physics...
Come to think of it, you're right. The JREF million dollars would be pocket change compared to winning the Nobel, opening an entire new branch of scientific study, and going down in the history books as having changed the course of human events forever.
Oh, but I have a feeling he'll just keep yacking on here instead. Talk is cheap and googling for complicated-sounding papers to misconstrue is easier than backing up ones claims.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
crkhd
☾☼☽


Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 2,401
Loc: A human sphere enfolding ...
Last seen: 9 months, 1 day
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: johnm214]
#17998753 - 03/23/13 10:42 AM (10 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
johnm214 said:
Quote:
crkhd said:
First piece of information: Sample A is from a lab, sample B from a plant. Second piece of information - Sample A was synthesised using reagents X,Y,Z through glassware P,Q,R, from electricity derived from X coal fired power plant, you get the picture. Third piece of information: Coal fired power plants are not sustainable, that glassware came from a beach in Morocco somewhere which pissed off the locals for whatever reason, etc. Fourth piece of information: Projecting 50 years into the future, if 4-HO-DMT synthesis continues in this fashion then X,Y,Z events shall have a high probability of occuring. So you see that by analysing the natures of each entity - not merely its nature as it appears (here,now) but over the entire 4D world-volume and all it is connected to, there become manifest the far reaching consequences of all our choices.
What this comes down to is you claiming there are some other variables that effect atoms/their constituents beyond those presently recognized- that not all particles with a particular set of quantum numbers are identicle. Please demonstrate this is not true for, say, a proton or explain how this isn't the reduction of your claim.
Quote:
In all due honesty I do not really understand what there even is to debate here, everything is readily apparent from just looking at the fact that lab 4-HO is lab 4-HO and plant 4-HO is plant 4-HO and realising the consequences of labs and plants.
Nice begging the question- the whole question is what the consequences of labs and plants are and whether given molecules produced therewith are distinguishable. You've presented nothing but assertion to support this premise. Please explain how to distinguish the two for any particular molecule.
They are distinguishable. That's tautologically true - my whole point here. You're probably not going to get some kind of clicky whirry "LOOK AT ME I'M DOING SCIENCE" lab instrument to measure this HERE AND NOW. But guess what you can do? Trace the origin of the sample.
A sample of 100% pure psilocybin is identical whether lab or plant synthesised. That's only if you take it as a 3D slice of the universe. But if you take its 4D pathway through spacetime then you already have the information that X specimen is from a lab and Y is from a plant.
Then another way to measure it is as follows. Suppose plants have X heat signature and labs have Y heat signature, their global contribution to the state of the Earth. For example, plants pull out CO2 and at present labs more often than not put out CO2 due to the whole process of burning oil to transport shit around. Assuming you have some perfect awareness/insanely sensitive measuring instruments, you measure average CO2 levels around the world. Ask your provider to prepare a fresh sample at a given time in the future. Just by the simple fluctuation in global CO2 levels you can say that X is from a lab and Y is from a plant and you could pin the precise point of synthesis if your instruments were so good.
Of course this is a level of precision far beyond an individual's measuring capability. But what we can do is exaggerate. On two separate planets, you get one to produce 10 megatonnes of psilocybin via lab and another to produce that same 10MT via plants. One planet will flourish with greenery, the other is going to be smoggified generously.
Point is, the information is not stored IN the molecule. It's stored in its physical POSITION in space and time relative to all the other events occuring. I have already shown that the past not only effects the present but also affects it. Things are NOT separable from their histories no matter what way you look at it. This is the point that many reject in this thread and it's their blindness to this that's rustling their own jimmies.
If you're saying 100% pure 4-HO lab vs plant bioassayed, then even then there will be a difference due to the way heat flows through the different specimens. The only way to reject this is to assume all movements are random and spontaneously created, and that nothing has a trajectory. But the wavefunction itself has a trajectory even if particles are smeared out. Boundary conditions are always fixed even when things are subject to probability.
Even if you have 100% pure psilocybin which has been frozen to absolute zero and back, the information regarding its past is never lost. It might be diffused into background heat beyond human recognition but it is never beyond the self-recognition of the universe.
Then there is also the matter of every individual molecule being its own 4 dimensional structure aka worldvolume, which we THEN group into 4-HO molecules. These are all 'separate' slices of 4D spacetime structured in whatever way. From this vantage point we could argue no two electrons are ever truly the same.
Yes, this is true for a proton and yes, this is entirely reducible to that statement. However you and I both know that this is well recognised, there is nothing new about what I am saying whatsoever. It's hilarious how JREF is brought into this as if it is remotely relevant. It's not a matter of psychotelepathokineticrekifieldchannelingchopradynamics. It's a matter of energy conservation.
Let's present an example. We have two apples. One is swallowed by an expert sword swallower who poops it out whole and untouched. The other is left fine. They are both frozen to absolute zero but first they are meticulously cleaned to the point that you could never tell either was touched in any way - we have 100% pure apple goodness either way. Then we feed them both to our faithful volunteer Diploid, who is informed of the entire process and made aware of the poop-apples in his stomach. He is told FIRST that the apples are 100% pure apple. If he's not certain then chuck every available measuring/imaging instrument at him until he is satisfied it's pure apple. Then it will be made known that one of the apples now in his stomach was previously up someone else's butt. How will he react upon being presented this information? My prediction:
-------------------- "Everything there is, and all that there is, is a Pattern of unspeakable proportion. The Pattern contains everything that is, completely fixed in succession, all the minimal particles interconnected in every way that is. Every way that is is not every conceivable way, because not everything that can be conceived is manifest in the pattern." "THE Human, you, is a miniscule but essential part of that pattern. In it lies complete fulfillment. It will never become something it is not, but it will never need to be anything else." - Wiccan_Seeker "If boring drudgery was the way of the universe, everything would have killed itself long ago." - Spacerific
Edited by crkhd (03/23/13 10:56 AM)
|
crkhd
☾☼☽


Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 2,401
Loc: A human sphere enfolding ...
Last seen: 9 months, 1 day
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: redgreenvines]
#17998855 - 03/23/13 11:08 AM (10 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
johnm214 said:
Quote:
crkhd said:
First piece of information: Sample A is from a lab, sample B from a plant. Second piece of information - Sample A was synthesised using reagents X,Y,Z through glassware P,Q,R, from electricity derived from X coal fired power plant, you get the picture. Third piece of information: Coal fired power plants are not sustainable, that glassware came from a beach in Morocco somewhere which pissed off the locals for whatever reason, etc. Fourth piece of information: Projecting 50 years into the future, if 4-HO-DMT synthesis continues in this fashion then X,Y,Z events shall have a high probability of occuring. So you see that by analysing the natures of each entity - not merely its nature as it appears (here,now) but over the entire 4D world-volume and all it is connected to, there become manifest the far reaching consequences of all our choices.
What this comes down to is you claiming there are some other variables that effect atoms/their constituents beyond those presently recognized- that not all particles with a particular set of quantum numbers are identicle. Please demonstrate this is not true for, say, a proton or explain how this isn't the reduction of your claim.
Quote:
In all due honesty I do not really understand what there even is to debate here, everything is readily apparent from just looking at the fact that lab 4-HO is lab 4-HO and plant 4-HO is plant 4-HO and realising the consequences of labs and plants.
Nice begging the question- the whole question is what the consequences of labs and plants are and whether given molecules produced therewith are distinguishable. You've presented nothing but assertion to support this premise. Please explain how to distinguish the two for any particular molecule.
They are distinguishable. That's tautologically true - my whole point here. You're probably not going to get some kind of clicky whirry "LOOK AT ME I'M DOING SCIENCE" lab instrument to measure this. But guess what you can do? Trace the origin of the sample.
A sample of 100% pure psilocybin is identical whether lab or plant synthesised. That's only if you take it as a 3D slice of the universe. But if you take its 4D pathway then you already have the information that X specimen is from a lab and Y is from a plant.Quote:
redgreenvines said: light cones is a new one for me.
the fact of the matter is that scientists will go in the wrong direction from time to time, and at least at some point it is discovered and accepted as false, eventually.
probably we have some confusion about entanglement, and computing at a quantum level.
in any case, you need an encoder and decoder to have a message processing event, and some materials will sustain that, like my list above.
The materials that have information are no different from materials without information when being processed without being decoded: i.e. the intestinal tract will have no receptivity to any messages imprinted on vitamines or wood or meat or other solid material, even if it had messages in it. it is not that type of system. AND No systems exist that extract information from individual molecules except DNA and RNA transcriptase - and the idea that DNA is information is a bit wonky in the context that is is not a recording of any events, it is part of an accrued/evolved molecular assembly method - and this is fundamentally different than information except in the most perverse view (such as patenting DNA sequences as personal ideas (possible and real) equivalent to poetry or physics).
to review
you need an encoder and a decoder that can work on a substrate which can hold information, or else you do not have information (the volatile record of events), you just have energy and matter happened (I am admitting that a tree fell in a forest which nobody witnessed but I am not buying vitamines with memory).
Those assertions are not really quite right. What do you mean by the intestinal tract will have no receptivity? No matter what, if there IS a message in the meat/wood/vitamin compared to another sample, there will ALWAYS be a different heat flow through the intestine and it will always respond differently. Not in a way that is meaningful to us of course. You're saying it will treat the message as 'noise' but you're using strict words that mean something totally far reaching there, same way someone says "I CAN'T remember" vs "I DON'T remember".
Also, information does not have to be a recording of events. Information is as it is, just pure data. It can contain recordings, it can contain noise. Either way, everything encodes and decodes but whether it is meaningful to a human is entirely dependent on its nature.
You say "those materials with information and those materials without information". But "materials without information" DO NOT EXIST. To exist is to compute. "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog" is information but so is "sodjasoidjoiajiiodjsaiojasoihjewhjroijf89033". The fact you recognise one but not the other is IRRELEVANT in the grand scheme here. They are both strings of data and from a brute force POV (which is for all intents and purposes how heat flow works) either is just a 44 character long string with equal complexity.
No matter what, this thermal noise will exist. If something has shape X and another thing has shape Y (whether as a 3D object or as a 4D volume), it will ALWAYS present a different signature. Otherwise we couldn't have computer visual recognition techniques which pick out individual items from a moving background of very similar items.
Computation ALWAYS occurs, thermal exchange ALWAYS occurs and it is always encoding the past. No escaping this. People can plug their fingers in their ears and noses and butts but the past is not going away whichever way you look at it.
-------------------- "Everything there is, and all that there is, is a Pattern of unspeakable proportion. The Pattern contains everything that is, completely fixed in succession, all the minimal particles interconnected in every way that is. Every way that is is not every conceivable way, because not everything that can be conceived is manifest in the pattern." "THE Human, you, is a miniscule but essential part of that pattern. In it lies complete fulfillment. It will never become something it is not, but it will never need to be anything else." - Wiccan_Seeker "If boring drudgery was the way of the universe, everything would have killed itself long ago." - Spacerific
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,759
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: crkhd]
#17999092 - 03/23/13 12:08 PM (10 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
the passage of time and the reflection of waves off of surfaces is not encoding even if you call it that. encoding means format conversion and retention for later decoding.
you can conceive of this happening because amazingly you are human and have consciousness that experiences and retains - later recalling the impressions.
you can do it, and you are dumb as a post, so why can a post not do it?
do not ignore how amazing the phenomenon is that your brain has become enabled to remember such shit through millions of years of evolution.
it is marvellous.
this is definitely not happening to all materials.
We do acknowledge that some collectors will value marilyn monroe's clean underpants more than mine, but it is unlikely they will be much different in dna analysis, so this could be a gold mine opportunity for you to declare that you have collectible products with unique history.
some might be vitamins.
(I will take that synthetic psilocybin thank you)
people will pay for stories, and for collectible items with stories attached.
it's all in your head
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Diploid
Cuban



Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: crkhd]
#17999140 - 03/23/13 12:18 PM (10 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
All you just said is that samples made in different places were made in different places and if you track them from the time they're made, you can tell which is which. Well, no duh. No one denies that a sample made in a plant and a sample made in a lab were in fact made in different places. 
But that's goalpost shifting. It's not what you claimed. What you claimed is that they have different effects. If you can demonstrate this, it will make you rich beyond your dreams and almost-certainly win you the Nobel Prize too and many hot geek women groupies. Hell, I'd even follow you around fawning if you demonstrated this.
Not surprisingly, you have not even applied to the JREF, let alone been noticed by the Nobel Committee or any geek hotties.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
crkhd
☾☼☽


Registered: 12/28/08
Posts: 2,401
Loc: A human sphere enfolding ...
Last seen: 9 months, 1 day
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: Diploid]
#18000348 - 03/23/13 05:58 PM (10 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
"Here it is not a question of the intrinsic nature of the molecule. We know essentially that psilocybe from mushrooms and psilocybe from the lab are identical. But the nature of the probability currents that run through these molecules are leaps and bounds apart and in the understanding of probability-space will we find the answer to this question."
It's goal-shifting as an appearance to your mind, this is one of my earlier posts in this thread.
Please explain why I need to apply to the JREF? I'm not making any claims outside the domain of falsifiability, all of it can be rigorously tested via various methods, none of which really involve psychokinesis or "supernatural phenomena". Nowhere am I even arguing that there is X or Y; only pure observation of the inherent nature of two different samples; I'm saying that "a sample made in a plant and a sample made in a lab were in fact made in different places" is what's important here. You asked where the information is stored, there it is. In the physical positioning of it through time and space.
-------------------- "Everything there is, and all that there is, is a Pattern of unspeakable proportion. The Pattern contains everything that is, completely fixed in succession, all the minimal particles interconnected in every way that is. Every way that is is not every conceivable way, because not everything that can be conceived is manifest in the pattern." "THE Human, you, is a miniscule but essential part of that pattern. In it lies complete fulfillment. It will never become something it is not, but it will never need to be anything else." - Wiccan_Seeker "If boring drudgery was the way of the universe, everything would have killed itself long ago." - Spacerific
|
Diploid
Cuban



Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Natural vs. synthetic vitamins [Re: crkhd]
#18000412 - 03/23/13 06:16 PM (10 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Please explain why I need to apply to the JREF?
Because it can make you rich. And I'm not going to buy for one second the usual comeback that you don't care about money. If you don't care, then give it to me, or to starving Africans or whatever.
I'm saying that "a sample made in a plant and a sample made in a lab were in fact made in different places" is what's important here.
That's not what you said. You said that they would have different effects on people. Demonstrating that people can discern the difference better than random chance guessing alone is sufficient to win the prize. No fancy lab equipment even required. Just a double-blind test that scores better than flipping a coin would score.
I'm not making any claims outside the domain of falsifiability, all of it can be rigorously tested via various methods, none of which really involve psychokinesis or "supernatural phenomena".
Doesn't matter. I happen to be intimately familiar with the JREF and know for a fact that if you can do what you say you can do, they will pay you the prize money. And I'm almost as certain that the Nobel Committee will also award you their prize as this would be one of the most magnificent discoveries in chemistry ever made.
The only reason you have not even read the application page and continue to blabber here is because you know full well that your claims are pure bullshit.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
Gomp
¡(Bound to·(O))be free!



Registered: 09/11/04
Posts: 10,888
Loc: I re·side [primarily] in...
Last seen: 11 months, 17 days
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: I really would like to have a comment from Gomp on this whole matter. a fresh opinion a dash of impartial poetic inebrity
I thought I was perm banned from this sub-forum ..
Recap it, and I will give my opinion! :p
Will not read this whole old thread..
--------------------
-------------------- Disclaimer!?
|
|