Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #630111 > unrolled thread

The Speed of Thought

Started byThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
First post2017-04-22 11:37 -0700
Last post2017-04-24 20:36 +0200
Articles 20 on this page of 72 — 16 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-22 11:37 -0700
    Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-23 04:35 +0000
      Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-22 22:05 -0700
        Re: The Speed of Thought Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2017-04-23 14:23 +0200
          Re: The Speed of Thought djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-04-23 14:17 +0000
            Re: The Speed of Thought "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 11:07 -0400
              Re: The Speed of Thought djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-04-23 16:31 +0000
                Re: The Speed of Thought "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 23:11 -0400
          Re: The Speed of Thought Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-04-23 10:14 -0600
            Re: The Speed of Thought Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 11:43 -0500
              Re: The Speed of Thought djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-04-23 20:36 +0000
                Re: The Speed of Thought Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 19:56 -0500
            Re: The Speed of Thought djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-04-23 16:24 +0000
        Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-23 12:35 +0000
          Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-23 13:00 -0700
            Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-23 23:38 +0000
              Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-23 21:15 -0700
                Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-23 22:38 -0700
                  Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-24 06:02 +0000
          Re: The Speed of Thought "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 13:52 -0700
    Re: The Speed of Thought Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-04-24 16:55 +1000
      Re: The Speed of Thought Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 09:09 +0200
        Re: The Speed of Thought Lintervallen Ruther <rt@lweaevte.ri> - 2017-04-24 19:37 +0000
      Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-24 09:42 -0700
        Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-24 10:22 -0700
        Re: The Speed of Thought Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-04-25 12:03 +1000
          Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-25 00:16 -0700
            Re: The Speed of Thought Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-04-25 17:42 +1000
            Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 11:58 -0700
              Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 02:25 +0000
                Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 20:49 -0700
                  Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 12:48 +0000
                    Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-28 10:37 -0700
                      Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 23:36 +0000
          Re: The Speed of Thought benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-25 17:18 -0400
            Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-25 21:53 +0000
              Re: The Speed of Thought benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-25 19:39 -0400
                Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-26 04:36 +0000
                  Re: The Speed of Thought john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 06:07 -0700
                    Re: The Speed of Thought john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 12:33 -0700
                    Re: The Speed of Thought benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-26 18:05 -0400
                      Re: The Speed of Thought john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 15:42 -0700
                  Re: The Speed of Thought benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-26 18:00 -0400
                    Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-27 03:13 +0000
                      Re: The Speed of Thought benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 04:32 -0400
                        Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-27 14:46 +0000
                          Re: The Speed of Thought benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 11:29 -0400
                            Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-27 16:32 +0000
                              Re: The Speed of Thought benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 13:22 -0400
                                Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 02:16 +0000
                  Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 11:43 -0700
                Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 11:50 -0700
                  Re: The Speed of Thought benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-27 17:21 -0400
                    Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 23:16 -0700
                      Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 12:59 +0000
                        Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-28 10:47 -0700
                          Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 23:54 +0000
                  Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 02:24 +0000
                    Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 23:18 -0700
                      Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 12:45 +0000
                        Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-28 10:38 -0700
                          Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 23:40 +0000
                            Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-29 10:47 -0700
                              Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-05-04 23:42 -0700
              Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 11:41 -0700
                Re: The Speed of Thought benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-27 17:20 -0400
                  Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-27 23:15 -0700
                    Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 12:57 +0000
                      Re: The Speed of Thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-28 10:41 -0700
                        Re: The Speed of Thought Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-04-28 23:45 +0000
    Re: The Speed of Thought SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2017-04-24 07:48 -0400
      Re: The Speed of Thought Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-24 20:36 +0200

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#630111 — The Speed of Thought

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2017-04-22 11:37 -0700
SubjectThe Speed of Thought
Message-ID<58FBA2D2.5616@ix.netcom.com>
The Speed of Thought


I don't think you girls have even begun to measure it correctly.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#630190

FromNed Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
Date2017-04-23 04:35 +0000
Message-ID<slrnofof8b.78r.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
In reply to#630111
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> The Speed of Thought

Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
or more.

> I don't think

We know.

Ned

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630191

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2017-04-22 22:05 -0700
Message-ID<58FC3603.577F@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#630190
Ned Latham wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Speed of Thought
> 
> Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
> or more.
> 
> > I don't think
> 
> We know.
> 
> Ned


The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...but how fast it can move.


Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can measure how fast thought can move.


Let me give you a simple example..

Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and give it to a letter carrier, the pony express.

A 'letter carrier' is a person who carries a letter containg your great great grandmother thoughts , jumps on a pony and delivers it.


What is the speed of thought? ....today, might be a little faster.

How long did it take 'this thought' to reach You? And add all the different modes of..transportation.


Also add galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light which also contain...information.


What is The Speed of Thought?


I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630210

FromSjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll>
Date2017-04-23 14:23 +0200
Message-ID<58fc9ce1$0$1811$e4fe514c@textnews.kpn.nl>
In reply to#630191
On 23.04.17 7:05, The Starmaker wrote:
> Ned Latham wrote:
>>
>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>
>>> The Speed of Thought
>>
>> Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
>> or more.
>>
>>> I don't think
>>
>> We know.
>>
>> Ned
>
>
> The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...but how fast it can move.
>
>
> Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can measure how fast thought can move.
>
>
> Let me give you a simple example..
>
> Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and give it to a letter carrier, the pony express.
>
> A 'letter carrier' is a person who carries a letter containg your great great grandmother thoughts , jumps on a pony and delivers it.
>
>
> What is the speed of thought? ....today, might be a little faster.
>
> How long did it take 'this thought' to reach You? And add all the different modes of..transportation.
>
>
> Also add galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light which also contain...information.
>
>
> What is The Speed of Thought?
>
>
> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>
Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of light, 
however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630218

Fromdjheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Date2017-04-23 14:17 +0000
Message-ID<oov91u.G85@kithrup.com>
In reply to#630210
In article <58fc9ce1$0$1811$e4fe514c@textnews.kpn.nl>,
Sjouke Burry  <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
>On 23.04.17 7:05, The Starmaker wrote:
>> Ned Latham wrote:
>>>
>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The Speed of Thought
>>>
>>> Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
>>> or more.
>>>
>>>> I don't think
>>>
>>> We know.
>>>
>>> Ned
>>
>>
>> The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...but how fast it
>can move.
>>
>>
>> Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can measure
>how fast thought can move.
>>
>>
>> Let me give you a simple example..
>>
>> Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and give it
>to a letter carrier, the pony express.
>>
>> A 'letter carrier' is a person who carries a letter containg your
>great great grandmother thoughts , jumps on a pony and delivers it.
>>
>>
>> What is the speed of thought? ....today, might be a little faster.
>>
>> How long did it take 'this thought' to reach You? And add all the
>different modes of..transportation.
>>
>>
>> Also add galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light which
>also contain...information.
>>
>>
>> What is The Speed of Thought?
>>
>>
>> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>>
>Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
>impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of light, 
>however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
>myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).

That was what I thought when I first saw this Subject line.  I
actually knew that number at some point, 'cause I asked my boss
the scientist and he told me, and I put it into _A Point of
Honor,_ at the point where the programmer tells the swordswoman
that, as you say, nerve impulses travel more slowly than
electrical impulses, so that (contrary to popular belief) she
*can't* tell whether she's in a VR on a local machine or a remote
one.

Thank you for providing the data again, so I didn't have to get
the book out and try to find it.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630220

From"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-23 11:07 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.33668d30e271d35098abd5@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#630218
In article <oov91u.G85@kithrup.com>, djheydt@kithrup.com says...
> 
> In article <58fc9ce1$0$1811$e4fe514c@textnews.kpn.nl>,
> Sjouke Burry  <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
> >On 23.04.17 7:05, The Starmaker wrote:
> >> Ned Latham wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The Starmaker wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> The Speed of Thought
> >>>
> >>> Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
> >>> or more.
> >>>
> >>>> I don't think
> >>>
> >>> We know.
> >>>
> >>> Ned
> >>
> >>
> >> The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...but how fast it
> >can move.
> >>
> >>
> >> Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can measure
> >how fast thought can move.
> >>
> >>
> >> Let me give you a simple example..
> >>
> >> Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and give it
> >to a letter carrier, the pony express.
> >>
> >> A 'letter carrier' is a person who carries a letter containg your
> >great great grandmother thoughts , jumps on a pony and delivers it.
> >>
> >>
> >> What is the speed of thought? ....today, might be a little faster.
> >>
> >> How long did it take 'this thought' to reach You? And add all the
> >different modes of..transportation.
> >>
> >>
> >> Also add galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light which
> >also contain...information.
> >>
> >>
> >> What is The Speed of Thought?
> >>
> >>
> >> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
> >>
> >Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
> >Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
> >impulses which are on the order of 50?99% of the speed of light, 
> >however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
> >myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).
> 
> That was what I thought when I first saw this Subject line.  I
> actually knew that number at some point, 'cause I asked my boss
> the scientist and he told me, and I put it into _A Point of
> Honor,_ at the point where the programmer tells the swordswoman
> that, as you say, nerve impulses travel more slowly than
> electrical impulses, so that (contrary to popular belief) she
> *can't* tell whether she's in a VR on a local machine or a remote
> one.

That would depend though on how remote "remote" is.  Across town, it would 
be hard to tell.  Lag from NY to LA over landline is about the same as the 
interval between movie frames--some people can see that.  Lag from NY to 
Melbourne would be more like a tenth of second--that's perceptible for most 
people.  Put in a satellite link and it's enough to be annoying in 
telephone conversations.


> 
> Thank you for providing the data again, so I didn't have to get
> the book out and try to find it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630235

Fromdjheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Date2017-04-23 16:31 +0000
Message-ID<oovF88.sDy@kithrup.com>
In reply to#630220
In article <MPG.33668d30e271d35098abd5@news.eternal-september.org>,
J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <oov91u.G85@kithrup.com>, djheydt@kithrup.com says...
>> 
>> In article <58fc9ce1$0$1811$e4fe514c@textnews.kpn.nl>,
>> Sjouke Burry  <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
>> >On 23.04.17 7:05, The Starmaker wrote:
>> >> Ned Latham wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> The Starmaker wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The Speed of Thought
>> >>>
>> >>> Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
>> >>> or more.
>> >>>
>> >>>> I don't think
>> >>>
>> >>> We know.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ned
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...but how fast it
>> >can move.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can measure
>> >how fast thought can move.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Let me give you a simple example..
>> >>
>> >> Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and give it
>> >to a letter carrier, the pony express.
>> >>
>> >> A 'letter carrier' is a person who carries a letter containg your
>> >great great grandmother thoughts , jumps on a pony and delivers it.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> What is the speed of thought? ....today, might be a little faster.
>> >>
>> >> How long did it take 'this thought' to reach You? And add all the
>> >different modes of..transportation.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Also add galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light which
>> >also contain...information.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> What is The Speed of Thought?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>> >>
>> >Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>> >Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
>> >impulses which are on the order of 50?99% of the speed of light, 
>> >however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
>> >myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).
>> 
>> That was what I thought when I first saw this Subject line.  I
>> actually knew that number at some point, 'cause I asked my boss
>> the scientist and he told me, and I put it into _A Point of
>> Honor,_ at the point where the programmer tells the swordswoman
>> that, as you say, nerve impulses travel more slowly than
>> electrical impulses, so that (contrary to popular belief) she
>> *can't* tell whether she's in a VR on a local machine or a remote
>> one.
>
>That would depend though on how remote "remote" is.  Across town, it would 
>be hard to tell.  Lag from NY to LA over landline is about the same as the 
>interval between movie frames--some people can see that.  Lag from NY to 
>Melbourne would be more like a tenth of second--that's perceptible for most 
>people.  Put in a satellite link and it's enough to be annoying in 
>telephone conversations.

Well, the distance in the specific context is from Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, to San Jose, California.  But the story is set
somewhere-in-the-moderately-near-future (Florida is being
evacuated because of sea level rise, hydrocarbon-fueled vehicles
are rare antiques, and full-sensory VR is available at a highish
price), so maybe their communication speeds have improved.  Note
that I am not an EECS major, but my husband is.  Or was, since
he's retired.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630338

From"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-23 23:11 -0400
Message-ID<MPG.33673700d3d9a498abde@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#630235
In article <oovF88.sDy@kithrup.com>, djheydt@kithrup.com says...
> 
> In article <MPG.33668d30e271d35098abd5@news.eternal-september.org>,
> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <oov91u.G85@kithrup.com>, djheydt@kithrup.com says...
> >> 
> >> In article <58fc9ce1$0$1811$e4fe514c@textnews.kpn.nl>,
> >> Sjouke Burry  <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
> >> >On 23.04.17 7:05, The Starmaker wrote:
> >> >> Ned Latham wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The Starmaker wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> The Speed of Thought
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage 80 wpm
> >> >>> or more.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> I don't think
> >> >>>
> >> >>> We know.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Ned
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...but how fast it
> >> >can move.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can measure
> >> >how fast thought can move.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Let me give you a simple example..
> >> >>
> >> >> Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and give it
> >> >to a letter carrier, the pony express.
> >> >>
> >> >> A 'letter carrier' is a person who carries a letter containg your
> >> >great great grandmother thoughts , jumps on a pony and delivers it.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> What is the speed of thought? ....today, might be a little faster.
> >> >>
> >> >> How long did it take 'this thought' to reach You? And add all the
> >> >different modes of..transportation.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Also add galaxies that are moving faster than the speed of light which
> >> >also contain...information.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> What is The Speed of Thought?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
> >> >>
> >> >Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
> >> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
> >> >Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
> >> >impulses which are on the order of 50?99% of the speed of light, 
> >> >however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
> >> >myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).
> >> 
> >> That was what I thought when I first saw this Subject line.  I
> >> actually knew that number at some point, 'cause I asked my boss
> >> the scientist and he told me, and I put it into _A Point of
> >> Honor,_ at the point where the programmer tells the swordswoman
> >> that, as you say, nerve impulses travel more slowly than
> >> electrical impulses, so that (contrary to popular belief) she
> >> *can't* tell whether she's in a VR on a local machine or a remote
> >> one.
> >
> >That would depend though on how remote "remote" is.  Across town, it would 
> >be hard to tell.  Lag from NY to LA over landline is about the same as the 
> >interval between movie frames--some people can see that.  Lag from NY to 
> >Melbourne would be more like a tenth of second--that's perceptible for most 
> >people.  Put in a satellite link and it's enough to be annoying in 
> >telephone conversations.
> 
> Well, the distance in the specific context is from Philadelphia,
> Pennsylvania, to San Jose, California.  But the story is set
> somewhere-in-the-moderately-near-future (Florida is being
> evacuated because of sea level rise, hydrocarbon-fueled vehicles
> are rare antiques, and full-sensory VR is available at a highish
> price), so maybe their communication speeds have improved.

They would have to discover hyperspace or some such to improve the 
communication speeds.  Light is fast, it is not instantaneous.

> Note
> that I am not an EECS major, but my husband is.  Or was, since
> he's retired.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630226

FromGreg Goss <gossg@gossg.org>
Date2017-04-23 10:14 -0600
Message-ID<em427qF9gktU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#630210
Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:


>> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>>
>Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
>impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of light, 
>however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
>myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).

There are some issues with running giraffes.  Apparently the decision
on where to place each foot has to be made some astonishingly long
time before the foot actually goes down.
-- 
We are geeks.  Resistance is voltage over current.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630231

FromCryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-23 11:43 -0500
Message-ID<XnsA760AA24A62A5melchizedek@216.166.97.131>
In reply to#630226
Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> wrote in
news:em427qF9gktU2@mid.individual.net: 

> Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
> 
> 
>>> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>>>
>>Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>>Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
>>impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of light, 
>>however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
>>myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275
>>mph). 
> 
> There are some issues with running giraffes.  Apparently the decision
> on where to place each foot has to be made some astonishingly long
> time before the foot actually goes down.

This is an issue for humans too. From the relevant XKCD 'What if':

https://what-if.xkcd.com/44/

"Throwing is hard. In order to deliver a baseball to a batter, a pitcher 
has to release the ball at exactly the right point in the throw. A timing 
error of half a millisecond in either direction is enough to cause the 
ball to miss the strike zone.[5]

To put that in perspective, it takes about five milliseconds for the 
fastest nerve impulse to travel the length of the arm.[6] That means that 
when your arm is still rotating toward the correct position, the signal 
to release the ball is already at your wrist. In terms of timing, this is 
like a drummer dropping a drumstick from the 10th story and hitting a 
drum on the ground on the correct beat."

[This is in the context of noting that the human abliity throw things
hard and accurately is unparalleled in the animal kingdom.]

pt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630281

Fromdjheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Date2017-04-23 20:36 +0000
Message-ID<oovqLM.1GH9@kithrup.com>
In reply to#630231
In article <XnsA760AA24A62A5melchizedek@216.166.97.131>,
Cryptoengineer  <treifamily@gmail.com> wrote:
>Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> wrote in
>news:em427qF9gktU2@mid.individual.net: 
>
>> Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>>>>
>>>Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>>>Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
>>>impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of light, 
>>>however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
>>>myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275
>>>mph). 
>> 
>> There are some issues with running giraffes.  Apparently the decision
>> on where to place each foot has to be made some astonishingly long
>> time before the foot actually goes down.
>
>This is an issue for humans too. From the relevant XKCD 'What if':
>
>https://what-if.xkcd.com/44/
>
>"Throwing is hard. In order to deliver a baseball to a batter, a pitcher 
>has to release the ball at exactly the right point in the throw. A timing 
>error of half a millisecond in either direction is enough to cause the 
>ball to miss the strike zone.[5]
>
>To put that in perspective, it takes about five milliseconds for the 
>fastest nerve impulse to travel the length of the arm.[6] That means that 
>when your arm is still rotating toward the correct position, the signal 
>to release the ball is already at your wrist. In terms of timing, this is 
>like a drummer dropping a drumstick from the 10th story and hitting a 
>drum on the ground on the correct beat."
>
>[This is in the context of noting that the human abliity throw things
>hard and accurately is unparalleled in the animal kingdom.]

Is it really?  I've heard some wicked things about the throwing
abilities of some of our primate relatives.  :)

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630314

FromCryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-23 19:56 -0500
Message-ID<XnsA76199038C89melchizedek@216.166.97.131>
In reply to#630281
djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:oovqLM.1GH9@kithrup.com: 

> In article <XnsA760AA24A62A5melchizedek@216.166.97.131>,
> Cryptoengineer  <treifamily@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> wrote in
>>news:em427qF9gktU2@mid.individual.net: 
>>
>>> Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>>>>>
>>>>Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>>>>Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of
>>>>electrical impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of
>>>>light, however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with
>>>>some myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h
>>>>or 275 mph). 
>>> 
>>> There are some issues with running giraffes.  Apparently the
>>> decision on where to place each foot has to be made some
>>> astonishingly long time before the foot actually goes down.
>>
>>This is an issue for humans too. From the relevant XKCD 'What if':
>>
>>https://what-if.xkcd.com/44/
>>
>>"Throwing is hard. In order to deliver a baseball to a batter, a
>>pitcher has to release the ball at exactly the right point in the
>>throw. A timing error of half a millisecond in either direction is
>>enough to cause the ball to miss the strike zone.[5]
>>
>>To put that in perspective, it takes about five milliseconds for the 
>>fastest nerve impulse to travel the length of the arm.[6] That means
>>that when your arm is still rotating toward the correct position, the
>>signal to release the ball is already at your wrist. In terms of
>>timing, this is like a drummer dropping a drumstick from the 10th
>>story and hitting a drum on the ground on the correct beat."
>>
>>[This is in the context of noting that the human abliity throw things
>>hard and accurately is unparalleled in the animal kingdom.]
> 
> Is it really?  I've heard some wicked things about the throwing
> abilities of some of our primate relatives.  :)

Their aim and power suck. While some animals can spit accurately
(archerfish, some cobras), nothing beside humans can pick up a
rock and throw it to kill or disable a prey animal. 

BTW, Munroe's pitcher description is a slight overstatement; 
the muscles which control the fingers are in the forearm. His
point remains, however.

pt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630232

Fromdjheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
Date2017-04-23 16:24 +0000
Message-ID<oovExM.rv2@kithrup.com>
In reply to#630226
In article <em427qF9gktU2@mid.individual.net>,
Greg Goss  <gossg@gossg.org> wrote:
>Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote:
>
>
>>> I think it's fair to say it's a little more than..."80 wpm".
>>>
>>Nerve conduction velocity - Wikipedia
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity
>>Nerve impulses are extremely slow compared to the speed of electrical 
>>impulses which are on the order of 50–99% of the speed of light, 
>>however, very fast compared to the speed of blood flow, with some 
>>myelinated neurons conducting at speeds up to 120 m/s (432 km/h or 275 mph).
>
>There are some issues with running giraffes.  Apparently the decision
>on where to place each foot has to be made some astonishingly long
>time before the foot actually goes down.

Perhaps the decision is made somewhere in the spinal column,
rather than in the brain?  Like the spinal reflex that makes one
jerk her hand away from a hot iron before her brain notices it.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630211

FromNed Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
Date2017-04-23 12:35 +0000
Message-ID<slrnofp7s3.ibt.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
In reply to#630191
The Starmaker wrote:
> Ned Latham wrote:
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > The Speed of Thought
> >
> > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > 80 wpm or more.
> >
> > > I don't think
> >
> > We know.
>
> The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...

Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.

> but how fast it can move.

If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
to acceot it.

> Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> measure how fast thought can move.

No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.

> Let me give you a simple example..
>
> Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and

Wrong. No-one has ever done that.

----further baseless speculation snipped----

Ned

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630266

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2017-04-23 13:00 -0700
Message-ID<58FD07F7.4D9@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#630211
Ned Latham wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Speed of Thought
> > >
> > > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > > 80 wpm or more.
> > >
> > > > I don't think
> > >
> > > We know.
> >
> > The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...
> 
> Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.
> 
> > but how fast it can move.
> 
> If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
> place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
> to acceot it.
> 
> > Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> > measure how fast thought can move.
> 
> No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
> and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.
> 
> > Let me give you a simple example..
> >
> > Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and
> 
> Wrong. No-one has ever done that.
> 
> ----further baseless speculation snipped----
> 
> Ned


They say the universe is...mathematical, isn't math...thought?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630306

FromNed Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
Date2017-04-23 23:38 +0000
Message-ID<slrnofqeng.36m.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
In reply to#630266
The Starmaker wrote:
> Ned Latham wrote:
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The Speed of Thought
> > > >
> > > > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > > > 80 wpm or more.
> > > >
> > > > > I don't think
> > > >
> > > > We know.
> > >
> > > The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...
> >
> > Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.
> >
> > > but how fast it can move.
> >
> > If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
> > place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
> > to acceot it.
> >
> > > Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> > > measure how fast thought can move.
> >
> > No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
> > and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.
> >
> > > Let me give you a simple example..
> > >
> > > Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and
> >
> > Wrong. No-one has ever done that.
> >
> > ----further baseless speculation snipped----
>
> They say the universe is...mathematical, isn't math...thought?

Nope. It's a result of thought. Similarly, but not the same, great
great grandma's letter is a result of action motivated by thought.

Ned

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630346

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2017-04-23 21:15 -0700
Message-ID<58FD7BC7.5C6C@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#630306
Ned Latham wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Speed of Thought
> > > > >
> > > > > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > > > > 80 wpm or more.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think
> > > > >
> > > > > We know.
> > > >
> > > > The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...
> > >
> > > Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.
> > >
> > > > but how fast it can move.
> > >
> > > If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
> > > place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
> > > to acceot it.
> > >
> > > > Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> > > > measure how fast thought can move.
> > >
> > > No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
> > > and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.
> > >
> > > > Let me give you a simple example..
> > > >
> > > > Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and
> > >
> > > Wrong. No-one has ever done that.
> > >
> > > ----further baseless speculation snipped----
> >
> > They say the universe is...mathematical, isn't math...thought?
> 
> Nope. It's a result of thought. Similarly, but not the same, great
> great grandma's letter is a result of action motivated by thought.
> 
> Ned


Information...'wishes' to be free.

The thought action is to free itself, by any means necessary...


by any mode of transportation, whether it's a pony, a telephone..pass
the speed of light.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630368

FromThe Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Date2017-04-23 22:38 -0700
Message-ID<58FD8F73.7FCE@ix.netcom.com>
In reply to#630346
The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Ned Latham wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Speed of Thought
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > > > > > 80 wpm or more.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We know.
> > > > >
> > > > > The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...
> > > >
> > > > Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.
> > > >
> > > > > but how fast it can move.
> > > >
> > > > If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
> > > > place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
> > > > to acceot it.
> > > >
> > > > > Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> > > > > measure how fast thought can move.
> > > >
> > > > No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
> > > > and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.
> > > >
> > > > > Let me give you a simple example..
> > > > >
> > > > > Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and
> > > >
> > > > Wrong. No-one has ever done that.
> > > >
> > > > ----further baseless speculation snipped----
> > >
> > > They say the universe is...mathematical, isn't math...thought?
> >
> > Nope. It's a result of thought. Similarly, but not the same, great
> > great grandma's letter is a result of action motivated by thought.
> >
> > Ned
> 
> Information...'wishes' to be free.
> 
> The thought action is to free itself, by any means necessary...
> 
> by any mode of transportation, whether it's a pony, a telephone..pass
> the speed of light.



But maybe I went a little to fast for yous with a pony express...i
shoulda started with...sending thoughts with smoke signals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630372

FromNed Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
Date2017-04-24 06:02 +0000
Message-ID<slrnofr58c.csl.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz>
In reply to#630368
The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The Speed of Thought
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > > > > > > 80 wpm or more.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't think
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We know.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...
> > > > >
> > > > > Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.
> > > > >
> > > > > > but how fast it can move.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
> > > > > place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
> > > > > to acceot it.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> > > > > > measure how fast thought can move.
> > > > >
> > > > > No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
> > > > > and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Let me give you a simple example..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and
> > > > >
> > > > > Wrong. No-one has ever done that.
> > > >
> > > > They say the universe is...mathematical, isn't math...thought?
> > >
> > > Nope. It's a result of thought. Similarly, but not the same, great
> > > great grandma's letter is a result of action motivated by thought.
> > 
> > Information...'wishes' to be free.

Rubbish. Information does not wish.

> But maybe I went a little to fast for yous with a pony express...i

Nah. You went a little lunatic.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#630470

From"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-24 13:52 -0700
Message-ID<4544f6aa-84db-4ed4-a56f-d98ae270f843@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#630211
On Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 5:35:21 AM UTC-7, Ned Latham wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ned Latham wrote:
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Speed of Thought
> > >
> > > Depends on the indiviual. Most people should be able to manage
> > > 80 wpm or more.
> > >
> > > > I don't think
> > >
> > > We know.
> >
> > The speed of light is not about how fast it can type...
> 
> Neither is what I said. wpm is how fast *thought* occurs.
> 
> > but how fast it can move.
> 
> If you mean thought moves from the thinker's head to some other
> place, you'd best state your hypothesis clearly, then show cause
> to acceot it.
> 
> > Once you understand 'thought' as information... then you can
> > measure how fast thought can move.
> 
> No. Once you understand that you have to state a clear hypothesis
> and show cause to accept it, then you can start to discuss it.
> 
> > Let me give you a simple example..
> >
> > Your great great grandmother puts her thoughts in a letter and
> 
> Wrong. No-one has ever done that.
> 
> ----further baseless speculation snipped----
> 
> Ned

I put all my thoughts in a jug and dropped it into the ocean.When found it will be better than a Genny popping out.Still its chancy.TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web