The Darwin Spin Off

[Madelaine McMasters]

5 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

I think some people have an innate ability to read emotions moreso than others.

Absolutely, even if only because some people have no innate ability...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social-emotional_agnosia

Might someone afflicted with such a disability think that the rest of us have supernatural powers? Would they notice?

Might those of us with average abilities think those with superior abilities have supernatural powers? Would we notice?

What might those with the highest abilities think or notice?

(Those aren't trick questions, just things I wonder about.)

If we're not aware of our abilities (or deficiencies), it's difficult to place credit where credit is due.

As a bit of an aside, my cousin is an FBI agent, has had training in reading people... yet likes me anyway, even as I test her ability.

https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/featured-articles/reading-people-behavioral-anomalies-and-investigative-interviewing

[Rowan Amore]

1 minute ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Absolutely, even if only because some people have no innate ability...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social-emotional_agnosia

Might someone afflicted with such a disability think that the rest of us have supernatural powers? Would they notice?

Might those of us with average abilities think those with superior abilities have supernatural powers? Would we notice?

What might those with the highest abilities think or notice?

(Those aren't trick questions, just things I wonder about.)

If we're not aware of our abilities (or deficiencies), it's difficult to place credit where credit is due.

As a bit of an aside, my cousin is an FBI agent, has had training in reading people... yet likes me anyway, even as I test her ability.

https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/featured-articles/reading-people-behavioral-anomalies-and-investigative-interviewing

I think as we get older and interact with a wide variety of people, we can and do develop the ability to read people.  Yes, some of us better than other.  What I found interesting that with my son, it seemed almost a natural thing.  It wasn't just with me but with teachers and other parents.  Or is it something we are ALL born with but lose along the way.  We know the mind is capable of so much more than we could ever imagine.  Instinct or learned is what I wonder.  

Your friend was trained so when she reads people, it's something done consciously.  My son couldn't have learned it so obviously he felt it rather than thought about it.  What was it he felt?  Vibes?  I don't know the answer but it has always intrigued me.

[Madelaine McMasters]

1 minute ago, Rowan Amore said:

I think as we get older and interact with a wide variety of people, we can and do develop the ability to read people.  Yes, some of us better than other.  What I found interesting that with my son, it seemed almost a natural thing.  It wasn't just with me but with teachers and other parents.  Or is it something we are ALL born with but lose along the way.  We know the mind is capable of so much more than we could ever imagine.  Instinct or learned is what I wonder.  

Your friend was trained so when she reads people, it's something done consciously.  My son couldn't have learned it so obviously he felt it rather than thought about it.  What was it he felt?  Vibes?  I don't know the answer but it has always intrigued me.

I think you'd agree that we're all born with native abilities and interests that we lose over time, for various reasons. Wanna start with... curiosity? Babies explore everything. As they acquire knowledge and develop interests, they also develop disinterests. Disinterests limit exploration. Sometime's that's a good thing, sometimes not.

Might an otherwise normal child who's born into an abusive or neglectful family lose ability to read people because they're learning in an abnormal environment? Research with neglected babies provides ample evidence of that.

If it's nature AND nurture, both have the ability to create deficits and strengths.

[Rowan Amore]

2 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I think you'd agree that we're all born with native abilities and interests that we lose over time, for various reasons. Wanna start with... curiosity? Babies explore everything. As they acquire knowledge and develop interests, they also develop disinterests. Disinterests limit exploration. Sometime's that's a good thing, sometimes not.

Might an otherwise normal child who's born into an abusive or neglectful family lose ability to read people because they're learning in an abnormal environment? Research with neglected babies provides ample evidence of that.

If it's nature AND nurture, both have the ability to create deficits and strengths.

I don't think they lose the ability exactly with abuse.  Neglect, yes.  I could definitely understand that.  With an abusive environment, the reading may get skewed.  The normal things most people grow up seeing are twisted in such a way to possibly give false readings?  

[Arielle Popstar]

6 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Might an otherwise normal child who's born into an abusive or neglectful family lose ability to read people because they're learning in an abnormal environment? Research with neglected babies provides ample evidence of that.

Actually the reverse happens. Children born into abusive/dysfunctional families develop characteristics that tend to make them hypervigilant of those around them. Problem though is that as they get older and leave that environment, they still carry that hypervigilance with them and tend to take everyone else's mood personally when in fact it has nothing to do with them as to why others are feeling up, down or sideways.

[Madelaine McMasters]

39 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Actually the reverse happens. Children born into abusive/dysfunctional families develop characteristics that tend to make them hypervigilant of those around them. Problem though is that as they get older and leave that environment, they still carry that hypervigilance with them and tend to take everyone else's mood personally when in fact it has nothing to do with them as to why others are feeling up, down or sideways.

I should have said "correctly read". Whether over-reading, under-reading, or mis-attributing, it's all mis-reading. I think that might address both you and Rowan.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Madelaine McMasters

[RunawayBunny]

I spend 10 minutes to read latest posts but I understand nothing reading some one.. it feels more like predicting some ones reaction.. it is easy if you know the person, its is hard if person is a stranger. Very very hard if you are living outside of your culture.

My people are predictable and sadly easy to manipulate it is a bad trait for a society.

[JanuarySwan]

2 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I should have said "correctly read". Whether over-reading, under-reading, or mis-attributing, it's all mis-reading. I think that might address both you and Rowan.

Regarding "reading" and what seems to be a sixth sense, dogs and cats seem to have this.  I've had quite a few pets and I've had some that will only respond to women and these were both male and female cats.  When men would come into the house, they'd run away.  But, with women they didn't know who were a stranger they weren't afraid.  I often wondered if the cats were afraid of men's big feet as though they might be stepped on and or if men's deeper voices scared the cats.  Some animals do seem to "read" people but what I've found is most pets with strangers prefer women and will avoid strange men.  My dogs too, a strange man comes in the house, the dog is barking.  With a strange women, no, no barking.  Actually this discussion reminded me of this today upon seeing a friend's dog.  She never barked at me from day one or minute one, but when a strange man tries to talk to the little dog, she refuses all men coming near her and barks up a storm and acts like she will bite.  And, also, my cats who have feared men also showed no fear upon meeting their male vets for the first time.  It's just weird.  

Edited March 29, 2021 by JanuarySwan

[Love Zhaoying]

7 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I should have said "correctly read". Whether over-reading, under-reading, or mis-attributing, it's all mis-reading. I think that might address both you and Rowan.

"RIF!" - Carol Burnett 

[RunawayBunny]

6 hours ago, JanuarySwan said:

Regarding "reading" and what seems to be a sixth sense, dogs and cats seem to have this.

It is not sixth sense but reflexes and balance. Both cats and snakes have very fast reflexes but there is a down side.. their reflex mechanism automated and they might unintentionally harm you if you make sudden fast movement.. because they are doing it without thinking. Their balance also improved, they always fall on 4 legs, they notice earthquake at early phase while humans feeling nothing.

6 hours ago, JanuarySwan said:

I've had quite a few pets and I've had some that will only respond to women and these were both male and female cats.

Probably owner of pets female and they when they smell female human they expect owner, but man is a unknown smell to them so they run away.

Many animals have far more advanced perceptional organs than humans they are actually superior in terms of perception.

[Ceka Cianci]

19 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Ooooh, this is in my wheelhouse...

Cooking isn't really what happens, though it's a common way people think about it. Let's do a little math.

"Specific heat" is the measure of how much energy is required to raise the temperature of a certain mass of something by a certain amount. For the human body, that's about 3.5k W*s/kg*C, where W is Watts, s is seconds, kg is kilograms and C is Celsius degrees. If heat is the thing that causes the damage during electrical shock, we have a well known temperature benchmark for worry. Heat stroke can happen if your core body temperature rises to 40C or higher. Typical body temperature is around 37C. So, we begin to worry if there's a 3C rise in body core temperature for an extended period of time. Let's allow ourselves one minute for this to happen. I'll do this calculation for me, who weighs (I blame Covid-19) 48Kg. A big fella would take longer to cook.

Rearranging the equation to solve for the Watts required to warm me 3°C in a minute, we get W = 3,500*48kg*3C/60s, or 2400W. That's more power than a standard 15A 120V (1800W) US outlet can deliver without tripping a breaker. We don't need as much power if you're willing to wait longer to cook me (there are some who'd love to prolong my agony, I'm sure ;-), but there are other limiting factors at work. To get that much power into a human body, you must have enough electrical pressure (voltage) to produce enough current flow to reach 2400W. Watts are Volts (pressure) times Amps (current flow rate), W=VA.

The human body, like all materials, resists the flow of current to some degree. It's difficult to state the resistance of the human body because it's comprised of many different structures (skin, bone, blood, muscle, fat, etc) which all have different resistances. Skin, because it's usually dry, has the highest resistance. To pass a current through a human body to the fragile bits, like heart and brain, you've got to first get into the body at some point, then out again at some other point (you need two "wires" to make a circuit). The most dangerous of the commonly encountered shock paths is hand-to-hand, where the current enters the body through one hand and exits from the other, passing almost directly though the heart. The resistance of that path (measured in Ohms (Ω) has been fairly well characterized, and ranges from 1200-3200Ω (well take the average at 2200). The voltage required to push one Ampere of current though one Ohm of resistance is one Volt, expressed in the equation E=IR where E is Volts I is Amperes and R is in Ohms, so we can also write it as V=AΩ. Those confusing letters were chosen to make little girls like us ask questions.

Again, Watts are voltage times current (VA), so we now have all the values we need to determine what voltage would be needed to push 2400W into a human body with a resistance of 2200 Ohms.

W=VA and V=AΩ(or A=V/Ω). Combining the equations we get W=VV/Ω. and finally, V=Sqrt(WΩ). Plugging in 2400W and 2200Ω, we find we need 2300V, nearly 20x what's available from a 120V household circuit. Even if I increase my cooking time to twenty minutes, I can't raise my body temperature into heat stroke range on household 120V. Even worse for the cooking argument, the heating doesn't occur uniformly throughout the body. It concentrates primarily in the high resistance part of the path, the skin at the contact points.

The actual damage mechanisms are more complex than heating. The most common path for an electrician to encounter in the field is hand-to-hand... the cardiac path. It takes only 1/50 of an ampere of current flow along that path to provoke cardiac fibrillation which can interrupt blood flow sufficiently to cause brain injury. Currents in the same range can interrupt contraction of the diaphragm, decreasing blood oxygenation enough to cause brain injury. I was taught very early on that I should always work on house wiring with one hand in my pocket, or gloved. This rule had me wondering if Michael Jackson had a second career as an electrician.

For a 2200Ω typical body, you can get 1/50 of an amp using only 44 volts. Curiously, the IEC/UL limit for maximum permissible voltage on unprotected exposed wiring in consumer products is... 42.5V.

You can also sustain direct neurological damage along nerve conduction path. Nerves operate on hundredths of a volt and vanishingly small currents and would be vulnerable to damage by external electric current. Neural wiring is also lower resistance, so damaging currents would preferentially flow along neural paths. Nevertheless, at 120V, I suspect that, unless the head was a contact point, brain damage is more likely a result of interrupted breathing or cardiac activity. Nerve damage at those voltages is more likely to be in the vicinity of contact points, the hands.

If the shock current is high enough, muscles will involuntarily contract. This is a real problem for hand contact, as you may be unable to release your grip on voltage source. TENS units can and do safely pass such currents into muscles without causing nerve damage.

I wondered if low voltage (considered anything below about 375V) electric shock might induce an ischemic (clot) stroke via some mechanism, but find only this article, which suggests it's highly unlikely...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3011102/

There are theorized mechanisms in that paper, including that prolonged tetanic muscle contractions might produce or release blood clots. Those clots might then go on to produce either a heart attack or a stroke.

In the case of the poor fella your father described, it's impossible to know the precise mechanism that produced his brain damage. The most likely explanation, which might not be correct, is that oxygen flow to his brain was reduced because of temporary cardiac fibrillation or interruption of breathing.

Well, He was up in an attic in the middle of summer.. It's a good chance he was soaked in sweat..

Myself, I was soaked in a puddle of water, my feet, my knees and my hands were in it as well..

[Madelaine McMasters]

48 minutes ago, JanuarySwan said:

Regarding "reading" and what seems to be a sixth sense, dogs and cats seem to have this.  I've had quite a few pets and I've had some that will only respond to women and these were both male and female cats.  When men would come into the house, they'd run away.  But, with women they didn't know who were a stranger they weren't afraid.  I often wondered if the cats were afraid of men's big feet as though they might be stepped on and or if men's deeper voices scared the cats.  Some animals do seem to "read" people but what I've found is most pets with strangers prefer women and will avoid strange men.  My dogs too, a strange man comes in the house, the dog is barking.  With a strange women, no, no barking.  Actually this discussion reminded me of this today upon seeing a friend's dog.  She never barked at me from day one or minute one, but when a strange man tries to talk to the little dog, she refuses all men coming near her and barks up a storm and acts like she will bite.  And, also, my cats who have feared men also showed no fear upon meeting their male vets for the first time.  It's just weird.  

Dogs and cats benefit from the ability to read intent in their own kind just as we do. Those that can't identify friend or foe, or read the signals necessary for good pack/herd socialization are eventually eliminated from the gene pool by natural selection.

Humans have been breeding dogs for 20-40,000 years, selecting foremost for compatibility with us. We've been at it far less longer with cats (8,000 years), which might explain some of their their aloofness. We need more time! Dogs and cats that don't read us well are eliminated from the gene pool by our artificial selection. Artificial selection works a lot faster than natural selection, so it takes far less time for desirable genetic traits to propagate through the gene pool.

[Madelaine McMasters]

6 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

"RIF!" - Carol Burnett 

"MIF!!!"* - Madelaine McMasters

 

 

* Misreading is fun!!!

[Madelaine McMasters]

1 hour ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Well, He was up in an attic in the middle of summer.. It's a good chance he was soaked in sweat..

Myself, I was soaked in a puddle of water, my feet, my knees and my hands were in it as well..

The body resistance measurements I cited were made with good skin prep, which would be akin to touching something with a sweaty hand. Your anecdotes are interesting, Ceka. I'm gonna keep this question tucked away and dig into it further. I still favor oxygen starvation as the most likely cause of brain damage for such a low voltage shock, followed by some direct neural pathway. Heating remains near the bottom of my list of potential explanations.

[Love Zhaoying]

21 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Humans have been breeding dogs for 20-40,000 years, selecting foremost for compatibility with us.

Before then, Dogs were breeding humans until humans became dyslexic..

[Arielle Popstar]

10 hours ago, JanuarySwan said:

Regarding "reading" and what seems to be a sixth sense, dogs and cats seem to have this.  I've had quite a few pets and I've had some that will only respond to women and these were both male and female cats.  When men would come into the house, they'd run away.  But, with women they didn't know who were a stranger they weren't afraid.  I often wondered if the cats were afraid of men's big feet as though they might be stepped on and or if men's deeper voices scared the cats.  Some animals do seem to "read" people but what I've found is most pets with strangers prefer women and will avoid strange men.  My dogs too, a strange man comes in the house, the dog is barking.  With a strange women, no, no barking.  Actually this discussion reminded me of this today upon seeing a friend's dog.  She never barked at me from day one or minute one, but when a strange man tries to talk to the little dog, she refuses all men coming near her and barks up a storm and acts like she will bite.  And, also, my cats who have feared men also showed no fear upon meeting their male vets for the first time.  It's just weird.  

Dogs and to a lesser extent cats, are quite codependent I think and will sense the degree of comfort the owner has with others. So if an owner is uncomfortable or fearful of a particular gender, they will pick up on that and regard that gender with some suspicion at least until they get comfortable with the specific person. Cats just can't be bothered to play the social game unless they are affection starved it seems.

[Madelaine McMasters]

5 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Before then, Dogs were breeding humans until humans became dyslexic..

Therapy dogs actually help children overcome anxiety that exacerbates their dyslexia. If one needs comfort, I could argue that dogs work better than their most popular anagram.

[Ceka Cianci]

13 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

The body resistance measurements I cited were made with good skin prep, which would be akin to touching something with a sweaty hand. Your anecdotes are interesting, Ceka. I'm gonna keep this question tucked away and dig into it further. I still favor oxygen starvation as the most likely cause of brain damage for such a low voltage shock, followed by some direct neural pathway. Heating remains near the bottom of my list of potential explanations.

I think mine was a lot lower than his, where with his.. He had cut through a conduit full of wires, then laid over it and cut into another..

I really have no idea how bad his was other than what my father told me..

Mine I just know I felt like crap for a few days after.. Cooking just might be a phrase they use and I'm taking it literal when it might not have been meant as literal..

I just know I'm really glad I didn't get as messed up as that guy did, what ever way it damaged him..

[Madelaine McMasters]

Just now, Ceka Cianci said:

I think mine was a lot lower than his, where with his.. He had cut through a conduit full of wires, then laid over it and cut into another..

I really have no idea how bad his was other than what my father told me..

Mine I just know I felt like crap for a few days after.. Cooking just might be a phrase they use and I'm taking it literal when it might not have been meant as literal..

I just know I'm really glad I didn't get as messed up as that guy did, what ever way it damaged him..

An old neighbor of mine was a lineman, and was injured while grabbing a streetlight that had been mis-wired, causing the entire lamp housing to be energized to (IIRC) 770V. He wasn't expecting that, and so hadn't yet put on his gloves. He was unable to release his grip on the lamp's arm, or the rim of the metal cage on the lift truck, and freed himself by lifting his feet off the floor to his body weight would pull him down. I remember seeing the scar on the side of his index finger there the skin had been burned. Other than the burn, he complained of severe muscle pain in his chest for days afterwards, as if he'd been kicked by a horse.

I'm sure, when he made that comparison, I asked him what he'd done to be kicked by a horse.

Don't ever come to me for comfort.

[Ceka Cianci]

4 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

An old neighbor of mine was a lineman, and was injured while grabbing a streetlight that had been mis-wired, causing the entire lamp housing to be energized to (IIRC) 770V. He wasn't expecting that, and so hadn't yet put on his gloves. He was unable to release his grip on the lamp's arm, or the rim of the metal cage on the lift truck, and freed himself by lifting his feet off the floor to his body weight would pull him down. I remember seeing the scar on the side of his index finger there the skin had been burned. Other than the burn, he complained of severe muscle pain in his chest for days afterwards, as if he'd been kicked by a horse.

I'm sure, when he made that comparison, I asked him what he'd done to be kicked by a horse.

Don't ever come to me for comfort.

I can sure tell you what it feels like to be kicked by a horse, even the different levels of kicks..hehehehe

Even colts can lay it in pretty good.. hehehe

[Madelaine McMasters]

16 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Interesting perspective on a Scientific explanation for God.

 

I like Joe. His take on the topic is approximately my father's, though Dad took Pascal's wager (maybe Joe would too, dunno). Joe says he cares deeply about the answer, and so can't call himself an agnostic because that implies ambivalence. That's not the definition of agnosticism. Agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve in god because they believe it's impossible to know anything about how the universe was created. That's also Joe's belief (or at least suspicion). He doesn't call himself an agnostic, but I would. Belief in ultimate unknowability requires more certainty (and less optimism) than I'm comfortable with, so I don't call myself an agnostic for a potentially hair-splittingly different reason.

I also can't say that I care deeply about the answer, in that I don't favor any particular explanation for how everything came to be, after disfavoring explanations that run significantly counter to physical evidence and reduce to the absurdity that Joe also rejects. That still leaves a lot of room for intellectually challenging alternatives.*

Unfortunately, I don't possess the intellect to understand all those challenging alternatives, so I'm forced to rely on "feelings" like almost everybody else, including Joe. Distrust them as we might, we're stuck with them. As a practical matter, the only feelings that are important are that, whether by design at some level or a magnificent roll of the dice, I find myself in a place where cooperation and kindness feel like the right way to proceed. In that way, I'm in agreement with Joe.

Regarding the value of competition between alternative explanations that don't counter the evidence**...

*Also plenty of room for people to explore the explanations I've rejected. I am but one of eight billion.

**I don't think Feynman would say that a theory of everything that counters the evidence is impossible. He might allow that "everything we know is wrong", but consider that so unlikely he wouldn't bother himself with it. As one of the greatest contributors to Quantum Physics, he was the embodiment of weighing probabilities.

[Madelaine McMasters]

1 hour ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I can sure tell you what it feels like to be kicked by a horse, even the different levels of kicks..hehehehe

Even colts can lay it in pretty good.. hehehe

Well, if I ever find myself in a horse barn with you, I know who's going into the stall first.

ETA: I'm waiting for you to respond "It's the second one who usually gets kicked."

Edited March 29, 2021 by Madelaine McMasters

[Love Zhaoying]

22 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Belief in ultimate unknowability requires more certainty (and less optimism) than I'm comfortable with

If a thing is unknowable, and you know it, does that indicate all-knowing is all that can be known?

[Madelaine McMasters]

19 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

If a thing is unknowable, and you know it, does that indicate all-knowing is all that can be known?

I don't know.

 

Or, I know, but I'm not telling.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Madelaine McMasters

[Love Zhaoying]

8 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I don't know.

 

Or, I know, but I'm not telling.

While it's humbling that you don't know, the real money (for me, at least) is on "I don't know, what I don't know..".