A Question about the Slith and Nephilim

[Alorael at Large]

Oops, you're right about the nagas. So now there's a clear correlation between independent civilization and hands. (The nagas do appear in civilized settings, but mainly as cannon fodder. The giants seem to worship them, though.)

 

—Alorael, who will amend his hands requirement by saying that any species can be civilized without hands if they have a subservient species to act as their hand proxies.

[Rent-an-Ihrno]

id say the pink stuff is some sort of organic goo, surrounded by acid goo.

[Thralni]

You probably think: "There's that marvin again who's going to try to convince again."

 

You're right.

 

In the meantime I've had discussions about this topic with several people. I also read a book about this. There may be small things that aren't quite true as I say them, but there you have it.

 

First things first: I said it about three times all ready, but I'll say it again. The human imagination isn't quite as good as we think it is. And by this, I mean also my OWN imagination. People find it very hard to create a reasonable looking alien, for example.

 

Now on to the main subject. According to what I read, our universe was created with a big bang of energy. from that moment on, molecules, atoms and quarks came lose of their first point (a small sort of ball. That is what exploded) and drifted around in the universe. Its the bang I'm going to focus on for now. During this bang, shorter than a second, all laws of nature were recorded. Therefor, thing as wizards and the like, can't exist in this universe. The universe expands every second with the speed of light in all directions. This using up light and radiation, molecules atoms and quarks. Because of this, in a long time (more then probably 10 billion years) all energy in this universe would be used, not leaving anything. there are three theories that count about this last thing:

• the universe will keep expanding, untill all matter is used up and time will stop;

  the universe will stop expanding at a certain moment and time will terefor also stop;

  the universe will expand untill a certain moment and shrink again.

You probably realize what this means. In all of the mentioned cases, no matter what we do, the human being will be doomed, and we would stop existing at one point.

UNLESS we go to a so called "second dimension."

 

Now what is a second dimension. a second dimension, is a second universe. This second universe also started with a big bang. Now we come back to the topic. Because this big bang is AN OTHER big banf, laws of nature that were recorded during that big bang, may also be different, allowing life that doesn't need tool use. Even wizards. Agreed?

 

Now that we have come to this point, We'll take the wizard as an example. A wizard is a human being with magical powers. So therefor, does he need tools? No. he doesn't. Does he need limbs therefor? No. Can there be civilization? yes. He can, in fact, make sign or just think of something he wants and it appears. good bye limbs and tool use. with such powers you don't need them. the magic wand and signs wizards make with their hands, also isn't necessary. Because what is it, what are they meant for? just to concentrate the magic in a direction. You don't really need tool use for that, yet you can have civilization. How can you have it, without tool use, and with magic then?

 

Because you can make everything you want and so getting society. talking and social skills you also don't need limbs for. Do I need limbs to talk to somebody? no. Ican do it just like the crystal souls do. it.

 

So what about moving? If snakes can move without limbs and slimes to, what do i need legs for then?

 

This is an enormous story. i know. But maybe this is more convincing than my other arguments.

[Thralni]

And that huge story of mine, I forgot to tell something. That big bang I mentioned is in fact proven to be true. The theories however, my not be true. The big bang in the second universe (if there is one) may or may not lead to other laws of nature. its is speculation, but don't you agree about these things I mentioned?

[Lochmacher]

While everyone has posited interesting and surprisingly intuitive ideas, they are limiting themselves by applying conventions and words to their thoughts. Why not have a species that is self-aware and one with all? It would not need a house, because the idea of a house is already part of it's existence. Hands? The idea of hands to manipulate would be unnecessary as all things are accessible, all relations moot. It is the water, it is the tree, it is the fruit. What creature would drink itself? Rend itself? Eat itself? Short of being incredibly dull (the game would be a blank screen since all things, being part of a whole, would not function without the sum of all, there would be no distinction between elements, sounds, feelings), the game would not even be a game, as to think of it as such would be to, again, apply words and notions to it and thus it would not be the real game. Though I speak of this, I do not know it for to know it is to not speak of it.

 

If this sounds familiar, yes... I stole it. See Taoism, Buddhism, and Plagarism (the last of which I was careful to avoid through practised re-phrasing).

[Thralni]

Quote:

Originally written by Lochmacher:
While everyone has posited interesting and surprisingly intuitive ideas, they are limiting themselves by applying conventions and words to their thoughts. Why not have a species that is self-aware and one with all? It would not need a house, because the idea of a house is already part of it's existence. Hands? The idea of hands to manipulate would be unnecessary as all things are accessible, all relations moot. It is the water, it is the tree, it is the fruit. What creature would drink itself? Rend itself? Eat itself? Short of being incredibly dull (the game would be a blank screen since all things, being part of a whole, would not function without the sum of all, there would be no distinction between elements, sounds, feelings), the game would not even be a game, as to think of it as such would be to, again, apply words and notions to it and thus it would not be the real game. Though I speak of this, I do not know it for to know it is to not speak of it.

If this sounds familiar, yes... I stole it. See Taoism, Buddhism, and Plagarism (the last of which I was careful to avoid through practised re-phrasing).

There is one thing that crossed my mind when reading this: What has it got to do with the things I stated?

[Lochmacher]

Ok, I didn't WANT to directly reply to you Marvin, while your topic was even more ambitious (ridiculously so, for this medium) than mine. I instead tried to illustrate this fact through the content of my post.

 

The last bit, where you mentioned wizards was probably the only part that tied in with previous posts (the Big Bang thing was a bit of a tangent, probably spurred on by the Earth vs. Planet X post). In answer to that: yes, wizards (non-party ones at least) seem capable of shaping their worlds to a limited extent (they did, after all, make the plant-life in the upper areas of Avernum suitable to their needs).

 

As for your cosmic theories and Z-particles, well, they are theories. Though interesting, you can't take these without criticism. To fail to question them is to retard their development. You did include this caveat, so congrats... As for energy being "lost" and our doom, we believe that energy can be converted or transferred, but it is never lost. The universe, even if it expands to the point of catastrophe (for us, anyway), will still have energy, mass, and gravity though they might not interact in their current array. Since this would take a fair ammount of time, and since there exists lines of research towards this end, could we not modify our orbit to maintain relative position? Could you kindly list your sources? I am intruiged by this line of thinking and wish to learn more.

 

Perhaps if the second universe developed a different relationship between the so-gennante "building blocks" and particles, we might have readically different sets of laws governing our percieved world. What if different forms (gaseous, liquid, firm) were actually different elements and not composed of smaller, individual elements with their own properties? What if fire was just that? Water simply water and not H2O? Just W1? Chemistry wouldn't work the same, internally (inside us that is) and externally. Let's keep this going... Your turn.

[Alorael at Large]

Even Buddhism is forced to nod to the illusion of our separate existences. Trying to do anything with total unity would be difficult and, to most Western audiences, baffling.

 

The wizard argument is the same as telekineses, except it goes farther. That's fine, but it also makes for an implausible alien. For whatever reason, while we swallow magic without a protest, magical creatures who can do everything effortlessly are found objectionable. Maybe it's our ingrained Puritan work ethic belief that everything should require effort, even magic. Anyway, following magic through to its absurd conclusion results in creatures that don't need any physical features, since all organ functions can be carried out magically. A blob of protoplasm is a perfectly acceptable sapient species. Or no body at all, and you have a ghost, wraith, spirit, or soul. Both have been done.

 

Again, suspension of disbelief and practical use are the limits, not imagination.

 

—Alorael, who is unaware of any proof of multiple universe theory. It seems by nature to be unprovable, though that has never stopped physicists before. His last check on the subject, which wasn't recent, seemed to indicate that multiple accessible or detectable universes have been discredited.

[Thralni]

Quote:

Originally written by Lochmacher:
As for energy being "lost" and our doom, we believe that energy can be converted or transferred, but it is never lost. The universe, even if it expands to the point of catastrophe (for us, anyway), will still have energy, mass, and gravity though they might not interact in their current array. Since this would take a fair ammount of time, and since there exists lines of research towards this end, could we not modify our orbit to maintain relative position? Could you kindly list your sources? I am intruiged by this line of thinking and wish to learn more.

I just wanted to comment on what I self said: about the energy getting lost. I'm really sorry, but I mixed up words. it should be
matter, not energy. Somewhere later i correcetd this and talked about matter.

I'm fully aware of the fact that this is all speculation and theories. But think of it. why couldn't it be like this? Indeed. It can't be proven YET. The big problem of science in my eyes, is that things we now see as proven, may change in about 50 or less years. Maybe, in 5 billion years, when the sun would explode (this is proven), we would be far enough with tehnologies to leave earth (at least I hope so). maybe THEN we can speak of proving a second universe and the like. But now, in my opinion, its to early to think about this being proven or not.

The theories about the universe (the three points I mentioned earlier on) Are also pure speculation. But don't you think, if they prove to be true, This would be really sad.

i'll now proceed with the limbs question. If you're on a world which doesn't contain of land, but, say, only fluids. Would it be really handy to have legs and arms? It would be an awful job yo come round. I also don't think it would be handy to have it on a planet with almost no gravity. Walking in air (if the planet has air, and the species on the planet need it) wouldn't be really productive.

there are enough ways to come round without arms and being exactly like humans. We should remember, that the fact that only humans (of which not long ago I discovered there were more homo sapiens than just four species. About 15 I think) could survive by tool use and we humans could slowly biuld up civilization, was because of our brains. if we wouldn't have had brains, so big as they are now, we would probably clime in trees like chimpansees do.

I'm sorry, but now I'm going to eat something

I've just eaten something, so I've enough brain fuel to continue.

This is a bit off topic, but I'll get going anyway. Why are we like we are today? because some caveman picked up a branch and made a fire of it? No. of course not. it all boils down to one thing. he had the brains to do so. If it weren't for our superior brains, we would end up being like chimpansees or something, or even worse, like the small monkeys on Madagaskar (if that's the correct spelling in English). What I want to say with this, is that actually, it wasn't tool use that evetualy brought us to where we are now. This probably saying, that, if a speices wants to be succesful, it has to have some sort of brains, this ruling out undead creatures like ghosts, as they don't even have a body to have brains. Slimes and the like robably also wouldn't have much succes, but they could have an other form of brains, like the simple worm has. That just contains nerves, and no central meating point like brains. This of course, isn't enough. the problem with slime however, is that if you stick something in it, it would immediatly damage the brain. i think I'll stop now, I'm getting tired. But if somebody wants to carry on with this topic, please do so.

(I'm glad to see I'm getting reactions by the way!)

EDIT:
Sorry, forgot your request. these are my sources, although I doubt they will be of any use to you (its all in Dutch, and you can't simply buy the book (I think)):

• A book called "de oorspong" (in English the origin) where several proffesors (including mu old dad) gave articles about how things came to existence. One was "the origin of the universe"
  An other thing is that i discussed this topic with several (Dutch spekaing) professors.

I'm sure though, that on google you may find something which explains it.
EDIT 2:

here's a book you can use (although its a bit old)

Steven Weinberg: The first three minutes (publisher Bantam books, 1977)

i recommend though looking on google or something. You could try under the kerword "Intelligent design."

[Alorael at Large]

This entire discussion has been about sapient species. Of course they need intelligence! Not brains, because nobody has proved that a brain is the only possible thinking organ and ghosts can think in fantasyland just fine.

 

Underwater, flippers are more useful than legs but hands are necessary for that manipulation. In low gravity, or even in normal gravity, wings or other means of flying can replace legs, but hands are still necessary. No matter where you are, you need some ability to manipulate your environment with precision and deliberate control, and hands are really the best way to do that. Or telekinesis, of course.

 

—Alorael, who wouldn't say that the plausibliy demonstrated is the limit of the proven in science. Special relativity seems very hard to prove, but Einstein proved it despite having no practical way to demonstrate it. If someone proves or disproves multiple universes on paper, fine. (It can still be shown to be a flawed proof later, but that has less to do proofs being inherently unreliable than the fact that scientists love trying to find the errors in theories so they can be fixed.)

[Kelandon]

Computer chips can think, too.

 

There were some consequences of special relativity that were possible to test. In fact, Einstein was mostly explaining really anomalous results of previous experiments that ended up providing much of the critical evidence for special relativity.

 

I'm not even sure what this conversation is about anymore. Again, we'd need to revise our concept of civilization to talk about a species that has a civilization yet somehow does not have tool use. I think the issue is differentiating civilization from "living in the wild," and the only possible way to do that is demonstrating that the species has technology, but how can one have technology without tool use?

 

Perhaps revising one's own structure and genetic code — if a species could modify that directly, then that wouldn't really be "tool use" per se, but it would definitely indicate technological progress. Eh, I still don't know if we'd call that "civilization," though.

[Thralni]

Quote:

Originally written by Kelandon:
Computer chips can think, too.

Yes, but that has to do with robots. I don't know for sure however, if it already is so far evolved you can call it thinking. Or was there a robot built who could really "think?"

In any case, computer chips are manufactured. This meaning that an intelligent lifeform should exist to make them.

You probably already knew that, but what the heck.

Ehm... Alorael? Try to stay with lifeforms that DO have a body and CAN be touched? If we are starting in that direction, we could end up talking only about which type of undead is superior to an other or something idiotic like that.Wizards may also be a stupid idea, but at least its a lifeform that HAS a body and isn't like undead (Off topic: God. I really HATE undead).

i can't think of any more things to say, but I wonder. I think it would be nice if more people good join this discussion (now I asked this, nobody would join of course...). This thing with the Big Bang is really somewhat interesting.

[Alorael at Large]

I'm just pointing out that creativity is the criterion of the day, there's no proven need for brains at all, and there is already literature with brainless creatures.

 

Undead are just a cop-out. They're literally not life-forms, and they don't have to obey laws of physics, biology, or chemistry. They also tend to have pungent odors.

 

—Alorael, who will accept that a sapient, civilized species could have no limbs and no telekinetic abilities at all if it had the ability to animate the corpses of other animals with the necessary anatomy to act as surrogate limbs.

[Thralni]

Quote:

Originally written by Fury #2:
I'm just pointing out that creativity is the criterion of the day, there's no proven need for brains at all, and there is already literature with brainless creatures.

Undead are just a cop-out. They're literally not life-forms, and they don't have to obey laws of physics, biology, or chemistry. They also tend to have pungent odors.

—Alorael, who will accept that a sapient, civilized species could have no limbs and no telekinetic abilities at all if it had the ability to animate the corpses of other animals with the necessary anatomy to act as surrogate limbs.

Who says there is no proven need for brains? (not meant to beoffending, just where you got the information). Doesn't a lifeform need something to "think?"

now what you said in your sig, is quite strange (as is a wizard), but seems not completely unpossible. I really can't think of anything though, that looks like what you discribe. But you do agree finally that limbs aren't necessary for a creature to have? (You yourself gave an example of a creature that doesn't have them...)

[Alorael at Large]

Limbs or telekinesis. It doesn't have to be the creature itself that has the limbs, but "puppeteer" critters have already been used to death in fiction and seldom in a way that makes them biologically and evolutionarily plausible.

 

You just said it. Creatures need something to think if they have any complexity at all. On Earth that means a brain, but silicon life on another planet could have something more like computer chips. The Oblongians of Planet Kgggi think with an organ that resembles a hamster wheel and that is in no way tied to anything but conscious thought and emotion. Autonomic control, reflexes, and the subconscious are entirely separate. You're showing your own limited imagination now!

 

—Alorael, who has also heard accusations of certain segments of the human population thinking with their stomachs. Whether this is true or not has not been seriously tested by any laboratories.

[Thralni]

I'm sorry to say I myself have just proven not to have much imagination. Of course, an alien lifeform has probably something else than a brain to think with. Now I don't really believe that can be a metal or something. even we, humans, know that can't be. Not only can a metal usually rust, but with these sharp edges, it can rip your body appart (if the body isn't made of some metal too). To have a metal brain, the metal should be something like gold, silver or coper. Only those don't seem to guide electricity that well. i'll think about this and post tomorrow again.

[Mortimer]

Maybe its very hot pink strawberry jam that holds the Eyebeasts together.

[kuc]

In brief; Slithzerikai + Nephilim = Philosophical discussion about creationism theories and philosophy?

 

Interesting...

 

What next, George Bush = logical?

[Thralni]

Please, kuc... read the first few posts before posting these stupid remarks. and mortimer, I don't think these are brains. The brains are pobablt inside. Don't you think?

 

Please people, don't start posting "funny" remarks, I really think this topic is interesting. if you're not interested, then don't post!

 

Sorry if I'm being to harsh, but I really needed to say that.

[kuc]

I did, and I agree with you on that point. I found them very interesting.

 

The subsequent derailment, however, borders on ridiculous imo =/

 

Unfortunate, to say the least.

[Alorael at Large]

Mortimer never said that the jam is brains. He said it's Eyebeast glue. I'm inclined to agree.

 

Keep a metal away from oxygen and water and it won't rust, keep it away from other corrosives and it won't otherwise corrode, and keep it from having a sharp edge so it doesn't poke and you have a perfectly good brain substitute. It would require a totally different metabolism, but that's what we're discussing.

 

—Alorael, who advises against keeping this discussion serious. It's a hopeless effort that actually failed several pages ago in a subtle fashion.

[Mortimer]

Any chance of getting a serious discussion out of me ended with this comment.

 

Quote:

Originally written by Marvin, the paranoid android:

There is one thing that crossed my mind when reading this: What has it got to do with the things I stated?

[Kelandon]

Quote:

Originally written by kuc:
In brief; Slithzerikai + Nephilim = Philosophical discussion about creationism theories and philosophy?

You get a Department of Redundancy Department certificate for this statement.

[Thralni]

Okay. i agree this discussion is slowly becoming REALLY strange. Maybe indeed we shouldn't keep it serious anymore.

 

(About that metal though, i really don't think its good. gold I read somewhere can actually guide electricity quite well. The only problem is, that if humans come to investigate them, their brains will be immeniatly taken out and melted down, and cheap rings will be made out of them)

 

After saying this, I think we should now all go and have a meal and a drink, and let's look at Spongebob squarepants when doing that.