Senior Member
I didnt mean to attack you, reading the message i posted i realize it sounds that way: my apolagies. I cant claim in wich way the riddle should be interpreted, but I would be disappointed if it relates to one of those theories. Crazy wasnt the right choice of words. I ment to say that there are a vast amount of highly hypothesized theories on the subject of evolution, so for us this would mean searching for a needle in a haystack. Im also often not happy with the way in wich they present their evidence, it either lacks any or is quite narrow. Knowing there is a scientific base to the riddle makes it easier for me to do research, it allows me to eliminate those alternative theories.Originally Posted by wmgeek
Senior Member
Hey can someone provide me with a simple summary of where we are going with this. Ive spent a little too much time away and am having trouble keeping up. I have read everything, but I want to help but not sure where to start.
I also want this because im going back to the TV studio Thursday and I want to give them an update. Im also writing a follow up atricle for Kotaku and want to include it.
Any help is appreciated. No crazy theories thoughJust kidding.
And great work all. Ive had to take a break from this for a bit as i put in way too much time but im ready to get involved again. It seems i took a break at the wrong time.
Senior Member
I'm kinda with Shady here. I'm doing research on a very broad set of ideas which is getting confusing for me. If we could focus this down to something more specific or a universal aim/theory it would be very benficial for us as well as any new comers/lurkers. To anyone just starting to look at this it would seem a bit daunting.Originally Posted by FatShadyHey can someone provide me with a simple summary of where we are going with this. Ive spent a little too much time away and am having trouble keeping up. I have read everything, but I want to help but not sure where to start.
I also want this because im going back to the TV studio Thursday and I want to give them an update. Im also writing a follow up atricle for Kotaku and want to include it.
Any help is appreciated. No crazy theories though
And great work all. Ive had to take a break from this for a bit as i put in way too much time but im ready to get involved again. It seems i took a break at the wrong time.
Senior Member
I was gonna try and speak for Kobe when I saw Geeks comment last night but see he's responded better that I could've lol. I'd look at crazy theories almost as a term of endearment in this thread personallyAll theories are welcome Geek, don't be discouraged by me or anyone else choosing their words poorly
I imagine it was this level of convolution that inspired the Wiki to be made. We could use some organisation. Maybe we should all mic up on Live and have a brainstorm.
hey guys, i do agree that i may have over reacted a tad...
...the progenitor civilisation theory is a little out there, however, it was anba's bookshelf which led me down that particular road....
...i'm trying to hunt down some of the other books... but am having a little trouble finding any eversions... if anyone can help with this it would be greatly appreciated...
Senior Member
A synopsis of Anba's book suggestion "The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning"
A number of authors have noted that if some physical parameters were slightly changed, the universe could no longer support life, as we know it. This implies that life depends sensitively on the physics of our universe. Does this "fine-tuning" of the universe also suggest that a creator god intentionally calibrated the initial conditions of the universe such that life on earth and the evolution of humanity would eventually emerge? Some influential scientists, such as National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins, think so. Others go even further, asserting that science "has found God."
In this in-depth, lucid discussion of this fascinating and controversial topic, physicist Victor J. Stenger looks at the same evidence and comes to the opposite conclusion. He states at the outset that as a physicist he will go wherever the data takes him, even if it leads him to God. But after many years of research in particle physics and thinking about its implications, he finds that the observations of science and our naked senses not only show no evidence for God, they provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that God does not exist.
Stenger argues that many of the claims by theists are based on their misunderstanding of the science. He looks at the specific parameters and shows that plausible reasons can be found for the values they have within the existing standard models of physics and cosmology. These models are introduced in detail so that the reader has the background needed to understand the role of the parameters claimed to be fine-tuned and judge the veracity of the arguments.
He also discusses related issues such as whether or not the universe had a beginning, what quantum mechanics implies about the involvement of human consciousness in affecting reality, and whether evidence can be found in nature for a divine plan.
Although Stenger has touched on the subject of fine-tuning in other books, this is his most thorough exploration of a topic that continues to intrigue scientists and the lay public alike.
I'll look for a download/online resource now.
EDIT: A few downloadable links here but they are .rar files which I can't open at work. Just use winrar or 7zip etc.
http://ebookee.org/The-Fallacy-of-Fi...s_1264296.html
A quick timeline of the clues...
4000 bc - cave paintings
1202 ad - Fibonacci's book Liber Abaci introduces fibonacci sequence
1452 ad - ???
1497 ad - De Divina Proportione written by luca pachouli with sketches by da vinci
1505 ad - Codex on the Flight of Birds - Da vinci wing design
1513 ad - creation of piri reis map
1585 ad - founding of roanoke colony
1618 ad - first publications mentioning mathematical constant e
1837 ad - darwin's tree of life drawing in note book
1908 ad - tunguska event
1928 - 1999 ad - lifetime of stanley kubrick
1929 ad - discovery of piri reis map
1966 ad - jj abrams born
1977 ad - voyager golden record
1979 ad - 42 - assuming it represents the hitchhiker's guide to galaxy
...given the disparate grouping of the dates...and the clues themselves...it doesnt really seem to suggest a steady "progression" of knowledge or events....the clues dont seem to be pointing to a timeline of the awekening or achievements of humanity, or a generalised gathering of knowledge by the human race as several of our larger breakthroughs dont appear
Senior Community Manager
1492 - Birth of Leonardo da Vinci (1452 A.D. - 1519 A.D.)
Senior Member
An attempt to summarise where I see the riddle today
Ill try to cover as many relevant easter eggs as I can, thanks for the dated summary above: it helps. I wont be going into the easter eggs in detail, thats something you can read on on your own. First of i think its important to establish a certain frame to look at the clues and the riddle. First thought is that humans are driven by a need to understand what is happening around them. Its a trait everyone can identify with. When we see someone is sad, for example, we will ask "why" rather then just accepting that sadness for what it is. A second thought, closely related to the first, is our need to explore or to go beyond set limits. Someone living in a valey will eventually climb the mountain to look whats on the other side. A third thought is that we are social creatures. The knowledge we gather is shared, written down or past on.
These 3 thoughts in a way define what science is: it provides knowledge about the world surrounding us, it helps us to understand what is happening and gives an answer to the question "why". The cave paintings are there to show others how they can obtain food: use your bow and arrow to shoot at the deer. Its a primitive form of science but to me its scientific none the less. Leonardo Da Vinci was a scientist, that did much more then just invent things; as was Fibonacci . They started to notice reocurring patterns in nature which led them to write down 'De Devina proportione' and the Fibonacci sequence. The accumulation of knowledge led us to search for new limits. We crossed the seas by boot and drew maps to document it (piri reis). With every new discovery came a limit set further away. Leedskalnin's (picture provided by Anba) work on magnetic current was groundbreaking, so was Nikola Tesla's work on wireless communication and many other things (i consider Tesla to be a relevant trackname easter egg found in 'Weird Science'). The implications of wireless communication must have been huge, no more boundaries in sharing knowlegde: the limits can be set even further away. Our knowledge of DNA has enabled us to create life, but at the same time we are aware of the fact that life on earth will eventually end. A meteorite impact a nuclear war or global warming are all potential treats. We are able to explore space and have a beter understanding of how huge the universe is. At the chance that their could be intelligent life in a galaxy far away we decide to build a golden record complete with instructions so we can share our knowledge with them. The next limit: understanding how the universe was created, and this is the big one guys, this is where we stand today. The Large Hadron Collider was build (second relevant trackname easteregg found in Isabelle) to simulate how the universe was created and what made life on earth possible, check the video link i provided there.
Arriving at this point Anba provided us some interesting reading material. In 'A short history of nearly everything' Bill Bryson tells the story of science through the stories of the people who made the discoveries. He does this wile placing emphasis on the development of todays modern human. He discusses the possibility of the Earth being struck by a meteor, and reflects on human capabilities of spotting a meteor before it impacts the Earth, and the extensive damage that such an event would cause. Life on earth is carbon based, meteorites provide this carbon and many other rare minerals that originaly enabled us to live. (i would place Stanley Kubrick here because of the movie '2001 a space odessey).
The second book provided was 'The fallacy of fine-tuning' by Victor Stenger. I mentioned earlier i was stuck on this one. And thats because Stenger claims the universe cant be defined. If the Large Hadron collider is succesfull in recreating a big-bang then we know what is necessary to create life, we would have the necessary parameters to do this and by this preserve our life as humans. Stenger, however, tells us this is a falacy. We will never find an aswer to this question. He basically provides us an unreachable limit...
Many apolagies for bad grammar, as you can see english isnt my native language.
Senior Member
Nice timeline Geek and summary Kobe.
Probably irrelevant but I read a lil bit about 2001 the other day. It's essentially a story of how human evolution got a boost through the use of tools. Those same tools in turn evolve also to the point where they hinder our evolution and we must cast them and our own bodies aside to continue to evolve.
Can't see any possible relation to this but thought I'd share it anyway
