| written by Pomelos on Mar 23, 2004 11:15 |
 | |  | | ![]()  | Raptorjedi said: | | Xeiran said: | | Usually our brains only use 10% of what we can use. |
You know thats a rumor right? |
Wasn't this rumor propagated by scientologists ? | |  | |  |
|
| | | | ![]() | Nalix said: | | It's not something that can be taught and it wont work for everyone the same way. For me, it was just a matter of "hacking" into my subconscious and tweaking around in there. |
Did I say that? Oh well, I'm just saying I would rather the medative method then the sound method if only because it is a actual skill learned and all.
| Pomelos said: | | Wasn't this rumor propagated by scientologists ? |
Most likely if it ain't scientology in there eyes it's worthlesst, or devil worshiping if your Jack Parsons or OTO. If I call them bastards will I get sued by them?
Bastards! | | | | |
|
| | | | ![]() Personally I think it's less. | | | | |
|
| written by Doozer on Mar 24, 2004 04:57 |
| | | | ![]() The reason people used to believe that humans only used around 10% of their brain was that men would come back from wars with parts of their brain blown away and still be able to function pretty much normally. Of course, now we know that losing any brain cells at all is going to mess you up in SOME way. The 10% myth is untrue.
Whether people actually utilize all their POTENTIAL is a completely different story, however. | | | | |
|
| written by Xeiran on Mar 24, 2004 08:29 |
| | | | ![]() I meant 10% capacity and potential. Using different memory techniques (other than repetetive memorization) we can easily remember large numbers and stories. | | | | |
|
| | | | I memorized 115 digits of pi a few years ago. | | | | |
|
| written by Naavis on Mar 24, 2004 17:07 |
| | | | ![]() | _rain_man_ said: | | I memorized 115 digits of pi a few years ago. |
Why?  | | | | |
|
| | | | | Naavis said: | | _rain_man_ said: | | I memorized 115 digits of pi a few years ago. |
Why? |
I guess mostly to test myself to see if I could do it. It also makes an excellent conversation topic or icebreaker. It's fun to see people's mouths drop. | | | | |
|
| written by Kalliope on Mar 24, 2004 19:10 |
| | | | ![]() Frankly, the mere idea of 'hacking' into your brain, period, is disturbing. Sounds like ample opportunity to screw things up. | | | | |
|
| | | | ![]() I'm going to assume you've seen Ghost in the Shell.
I don't need to crack my brain, or even hack some effiency out of it...I think that might be the problem I might need a few floating point operations in there. | | | | |
|
| written by Kalliope on Mar 24, 2004 22:38 |
| | | | ![]() No, as a matter of fact, I have not seen Ghost in the Shell (either the movie or SAC or both, take yer pick). I have heard about it, quite a bit, however
But both that and the sort of 'hacking' that's being discussed here give me the heebie-jeebies. Chills. Bad feeling. You get the picture. | | | | |
|
| written by Overtilt on Mar 25, 2004 21:54 |
| | | | I wouldn't exactly call it hacking. Manipulating, to a certain degree, yes. But not hacking. And I mean manipulating in the way you manipulate your body temperature by bathing in hot water. It's just about using a special frequency to produce certain states of mind. It's not like you can control someone's thoughts and actions with it. It's not like you can explode someone's head with it, like in scanners. | | | | |
|
| written by Kalliope on Mar 25, 2004 22:37 |
| | | | ![]() Well, yeah, I know that. But I don't trust myself not to screw things up if I were to try messing with my inner workings. The same way I wouldn't sit in a tub of water at 104 degrees Fahrenheit, and even more definitely not if I was running a fever! | | | | |
|
| written by Overtilt on Mar 25, 2004 22:40 |
| | | | Well, that's excatly when you should be in a tub of hot water! Your immune system creates the fever to kill the viruses in your body, why not give it a hand? | | | | |
|
| written by Kalliope on Mar 25, 2004 22:44 |
| | | | ![]() Because a sustained fever like that also kills YOU. | | | | |
|
| 
