- No Recommendations yet - go add some!
- @gravitybob:
agreed, and saying people don't take dead cats to the vet is a bit naive. That's exactly where you take dead cats, especially in NYC where you can't just bury it in the yard.
- @Eddie:
I like the hypothesis, but good luck convincing a thermodynamics expert. The common claim is we are proceeding towards disorder.
I'm not so sure my self.
- I am still surprised no one has talked about the compound mechanics of a cat's legs that are so very different from our own. This has a huge amount to do with absorbing/distributing forces upon impact.
Tyson is correct in terms of all the physics.
My problem with the whole discussion came in with "knowing," and it became such philosophical nonsense.
- @ cat person:
I think you misread what I was saying. I'm not the one claiming "knowing" has much to do with it. I was saying exactly what you were saying about reactionary body moves and talking about "knowing" is a bit ridiculous. I think its actually the astrophysicist you have a qualm with...
- I'm not sure why people are obsessed with being able to "know" whether you are falling or not. The body goes through many instinctual, physiological reactions due to a change in pressure,ground removed from under the feet, inner ear changes, nerves of hair or skin being stimulated, or visual cues. Like it or not, the body does plenty to take care of itself in such situations without letting one "decide," such example is the cat flipping over quickly, same as allowing the body to finally relax, etc.
Cat falls, body does like so, because of the bodies reactions it survives better under various conditions. Why has this thrown so many flags?
- @Jack from Blacksburg:
Brilliant comment. This is so great to hear from someone who has a form of autism, as it has been long known they there is a different thought pattern.
Sounds like you may have provided the missing link as to what it might have been like pre-verbal times. The guest on the show implied they don't "think" as we know it, prior to age 6 or 7, which may be true meaning we don't think in verbal form. Seems like once the conceptualizations of verbalization sink in something happens and we literally think differently.
Sounds like what you might be saying is, prior to the verbal set it, it is much more image based and tactile, but once the verbal aspect has set in fully, there is an immutable irreversible cohesion of two though types.
Super interesting. It would be great to get an episode with a person with autism.
- @ Al from Sacramento from Sacramento:
Love the comment, and although I agree there is some semantic play here, what you have just described is no different than the "social network of technology." The mechanics of a single body to operate or reproduce, whether directly or indirectly (via communication, tools, chemically, etc) is really no different than the way technology replicates.
Since "will" is an illusion, does it really matter the "why" or really even "how" something evolves or replicates, or only that it does?
