We can't feel anything instantly, this is troubling me?

[DarkFalz]

I know this might be just a strange thought that i had (like many) others, but since everything we feel, like taste, sound, vision, etc etc, takes some time to be transformed into electrical signals for our brain to process, and hence become something we can become conscious of, could it be that we feel everything with a delay?

I mean, if a woman touches my hand and says that she loves me, i won't be feeling the her hand our hearing her voice she at the exact same time she wanted to transmit it to me, in fact, once the signal arrives to my brain, she may not even want to me to have it anymore!

This idea is troubling me! I'm obcessing over it!

In the end, can we only feel what everyone else wants to transmit to us with a delay? Can we never feel the other person's' actions or feeling at the exact same time they wanted us to feel those actions/feelings?
Any thoughts about this?

 

[phinds]

Any thoughts about this?

Yeah, I think you are over thinking this and obsessing about something that is unimportant.

 

[DarkFalz]

Why do you say it is unimportant?

 

[Bandersnatch]

Because no information in the universe travels instantenously, and expecting something else is silly.

But take heart, your sense of self is a product of factors beyond your control, free will is an illusion, and you die every time you go to sleep. Aint's human condition grand?

 

[DarkFalz]

Reality seems weird in fact :S but it seems strange to face reality after thinking about something like this. Like grabbing a woman's hand and knowning that she will always feel something i wanted to send some miliseconds ago...

 

[Pythagorean]

It's even worse, you're never actually feeling her hand or hearing her voice. Your brain is interpreting signals caused by her hand and her voice and your feeling the representation of them as coded in your sensory and processing systems.

 

[zoki85]

It's even worse, you're never actually feeling her hand or hearing her voice. Your brain is interpreting signals caused by her hand and her voice and your feeling the representation of them as coded in your sensory and processing systems.

Why is worse? These interpretations make you feel good (usually):p

 

[Pythagorean]

Why is worse? These interpretations make you feel good (usually):p

In terms of the OP's complaint of not feeling something instantly... I'm upping the ante to not actually feeling the thing at all :P

 

[ellipsis]

It goes even deeper! GR states that the idea of 'synchronicity' is impossible - two events cannot happen at the same time. (Or, more accurately, in each reference frame, the relative time of the events change, and each reference frame is just as valid as any other)

 

[russ_watters]

Why do you say it is unimportant?

Because the delay has no effect in this case: it doesn't cause any problems (it can if you have an actual reaction-time dependent action).

Why do you think it is important?

 

[ellipsis]

Because the delay has no effect in this case: it doesn't cause any problems (it can if you have an actual reaction-time dependent action).

Why do you think it is important?

Hey, don't be so dismissive - this is a beautiful moment; DarkFalz is, for the first time, realizing that reality is not quite what it seems. That is to say, most of what we can utter is subjective.

 

[russ_watters]

Hey, don't be so dismissive - this is a beautiful moment; DarkFalz is, for the first time, realizing that reality is not quite what it seems. That is to say, most of what we can utter is subjective.

I'm not being dismissive, I'm helping him/her take the next step: realizing that it doesn't matter. And that's the more important step in my opinion.

 

[Danger]

It goes even deeper! GR states that the idea of 'synchronicity' is impossible - two events cannot happen at the same time. (Or, more accurately, in each reference frame, the relative time of the events change, and each reference frame is just as valid as any other)

Well... that's a bit of a stretch to think of the number of quantum fluctuations in the Universe and say that no two can happen at the same time.
Anyhow, I agree with the Python (hey, dude... long time). You can never actually touch anyone else, or anything else, due to electronic repulsion... but you can get close enough for all practical purposes.

 

[Simon Bridge]

Well... that's a bit of a stretch to think of the number of quantum fluctuations in the Universe and say that no two can happen at the same time.

That's not what was being said.
In any reference frame where two events are simultaneous there are infinitely many where the same two events are not.

Anyhow, I agree with the Python (hey, dude... long time). You can never actually touch anyone else, or anything else, due to electronic repulsion... but you can get close enough for all practical purposes.

... technically, that is what the word "touch" means: getting close enough for practical purposes. It's just that people have these quaint pictures in their heads about what a surface is.
What you are doing is finding out what physically happens when you make some naive observation.

I mean, if a woman touches my hand and says that she loves me, i won't be feeling the her hand our hearing her voice she at the exact same time she wanted to transmit it to me, in fact, once the signal arrives to my brain, she may not even want to me to have it anymore!

... anyone that fickle will probably be able to communicate that to you before your own signals have a change to be transmitted so you are fine.
Unless you mean that it can take days or weeks for you to register the contact as a sensory input?
So long as you have a regular and functional human nervous system, you are getting the message at the time she wants you to - the delay for you just thinking up a response is far bigger than the delay in your nervous system after all.

It's all a bit like worrying that because of the time it takes it to reach your stomach, none of the food you eat is really fresh.

 

[Danger]

That's not what was being said.
In any reference frame where two events are simultaneous there are infinitely many where the same two events are not.

Alright, I didn't realize that the multiverse theory (in which I believe) was being referenced.
As to the rest of your post, your sense of humour is apparently not aligned with mine.

 

[ellipsis]

Alright, I didn't realize that the multiverse theory (in which I believe) was being referenced.
As to the rest of your post, your sense of humour is apparently not aligned with mine.

I would like to ask you why you consider multiverse theory (i.e. many universes, MW) to be true. If you don't think it'll derail the thread.

 

[edward]

It's even worse, you're never actually feeling her hand or hearing her voice. Your brain is interpreting signals caused by her hand and her voice and your feeling the representation of them as coded in your sensory and processing systems.

Tis better to have felt and lost than never to have felt at all. .)

 

[Danger]

Tis better to have felt and lost than never to have felt at all. .)

The way that I heard it was: ""Tis better to have loved and lost, than wed and be forever bossed."
Ellipsis, it probably would derail the thread if carried for a long time, but the basic answer is comfort. I'm not a scientist, but I love science and it is essentially my religion. I'm a terminally ill Atheist. While I'm not in the least afraid of dying (and in fact have done so briefly), I don't care to consider a Universe that doesn't include me. The multiverse concept gives me the illusion that some version of me will always be alive in some timeline.

 

[Simon Bridge]

Alright, I didn't realize that the multiverse theory (in which I believe) was being referenced.

"Multiverse theory" is pretty vague - it could refer to a number of different ideas and I don't know which one you refer to.
I was talking about single-universe Einsteinian relativity and the famous result in simultaniety:
If two events are simultaneous in some reference frame, then they will not be simultaneous in a reference frame that is moving with respect to that one.

As to the rest of your post, your sense of humour is apparently not aligned with mine.

... Humor is so personal ... however I was extrapolating from the information you provided in post #1.

You seem to be telling us that a woman can change her mind about you in the time it takes for her touch to register in your brain ... it follows that either the women you meet change their minds in a fraction of a second or that it takes an inordinate amount of time for nerve signals to travel up your arm. Which is it?

OTOH: if you are just worried about the timing, then you need not fear - the nerve signals are such a small part of the overall delay in responding you should really just concentrate on being yourself and relax more - women often prefer relaxed people. More generally, we have evolved to deal with sensing events fractionally after they have happened so it needn't bother us on a day-to-day basis.

 

[Danger]

"Multiverse theory" is pretty vague - it could refer to a number of different ideas and I don't know which one you refer to.
I was talking about single-universe Einsteinian relativity and the famous result in simultaniety:
If two events are simultaneous in some reference frame, then they will not be simultaneous in a reference frame that is moving with respect to that one.

... Humor is so personal ... however I was extrapolating from the information you provided in post #1.

Oh, okay to the first part of that. As to the second part, post #1 wasn't me.

 

[Simon Bridge]

Oh sorry - in that case I was riffing off the concerns raised in post #1 and forgot to mark it properly.
Excuse.

 

[jz92wjaz]

On the bright side, if you touch someone's hand with yours, the signal is delayed for both of you, so you feel the touch at roughly the same time. You don't communicate instantly, but you can still feel the effects of the same past event at the same time.

 

[ellipsis]

The communication delay in real-time skill-based video games is on the scale of 30 to 100 ms, and yet we still manage to play 'em.

 

[Danger]

If you want to get really technical about it, it also depends upon which specific sense you are accessing (touch, smell, sight...) because not only are the neuronal pathways between the sensory organs and the associated brain structures of differing lengths, but the convolutions within those structures and the distances back to the cerebral cortex are different. In any event, the conscious perception-to-response time is far longer than the sensory stimulus-to-consciousness time. That's still pretty fast.

edit: Autonomous reflexes such as pulling back from a hot stove are even faster because they bypass the cerebral cortex processing.