# Info Part 01 of 24 (1,798 words) INFO ==================================================================================================== “Hypothetically, is ‘intelligence’ able to ever naturally occur if ‘confirming things’ was/is never possible?” I don’t think so because one would not even be able to confirm that they even thought/had a thought. “Confirmation is Foundational: The act of confirming or verifying things is an inescapable requirement to form knowledge. Belief without confirmation is not the same as knowing. Credibility is Not Verification: Believing something solely based on the credibility of the source is not a form of verification or confirmation. ‘One can convince an other that something is the case, but that doesn’t mean that they convinced them of a proven fact’.” Abstract things are not physical and “are not able to be tasted due to the fact that they do not have physical attributes such as flavor”. Language/memories/emotion/emotions are never not “abstract and non-physical”. “Are the words ‘gauge’ and ‘judge’ synonymous in a way whereby either of both of those words can be used to convey ‘what one does to find out the “how much of an extent” something is’?” They are not entirely synonymous but they can be used interchangeably in many cases. Also, saying “use your judgement to measure whether the situation is too dangerous” is the same as saying “gauge whether the situation is too dangerous”. “Impossibilities according to current Quantum Mechanics theories: - Simultaneously knowing position and momentum exactly (Heisenberg) - Cloning unknown quantum states (No-Cloning Theorem) - Measurement without affecting the system - ‘Deterministic prediction of quantum outcomes’ depending on whether the universe is deterministic, ‘having an extent of stochasticness’, or ‘having an extent of inscrutably complexness’.” Are there any two different-than-each-other frequencies that would enable two atoms to occupy the same exact space at the same exact time? “Has there been any proof of accessing ‘other universes/realms/domains’ via frequency, vibration etc.? No — that remains in the realm of speculation, metaphors, or non-empirical ideas.” Has there been confirmed scientific proof of “other universes/realms/domains”? No — not yet. “Does God have volition and self-agency? Are those included as part of omnipotence?” “Language is not an entity, a mood is not an entity, but a rock is an entity, and a soul, if exists, is an entity”, correct? If all were to become one, “due to there being no other to compare one to”, there would not be able to be things such as “personalities, perspectives, attractiveness, appealingness, etc”. Has there ever been a confirmed, verifiable case of a human who had a sensory organ/etc capable of sensing physical dimensions that are other than 3D? Has there ever been a confirmed, verifiable case of a “person transitioning” or “person who had transitioned” from one physical dimension (like our 3D space) into another (such as a 4D or 5D space)? Neutrality = one’s state of non-interference without investment. It’s “when you’re aware something exists, you’re not helping or hindering it, & you genuinely don’t have a stake in the outcome”, or “cases of no malice, no allegiance, just coexistence without engagement”, or “non-interference if due to ‘neutral indifference or because you doesn’t care’, but if due to respectful restraint, it’s respect instead”. “You don’t have to be part of the reason why/how there is ‘what is simultaneously “non-benevolent” and’ non-neutral”(, and unnecessary harm) at this world. An adult asks two kids “what’s the best memory you have?”. One kid answers “when I went on a Cruise for family vacation”. The other kid answers “when I used my superpowers to defeat The Hulk”. Did both kids interpret “what the word ‘memory’ refers to” properly? When did biological ai first exist? When did xenobots first exist? The first Xenobots were created in 2020. When was the first TV show “available for internet streaming” without one having had to “download the ‘episode or show’ in order to have viewed it”? Around 1997, there was ABC News website that offered viewing of ABC “World News Tonight”. The website offered video clips from “World News Tonight” segments that were no more than 20 seconds long. “You had to download to play them, there was no streaming, and even these short clips took a long time to download”. More than only recognizing speech, when was AI first able to “give accurate answers to a variety of human’s questions” in normal computer English “text or audio” without human intervention nor long “no-response times” in between its giving answers? The first AI system that was able to do such is/was IBM’s Watson, which was introduced in 2011. It even competed and won against human contestants in the quiz show Jeopardy!. When were common household computers first commonly being used for recreational video chatting? Did CU-SeeMe require broadband internet connection during the year 2000? Did the majority of households have WiFi during the year 2000? In the year 2000, the majority of households did not have WiFi; according to data from the Pew Research Center and Statista, only around 42% of US households had internet access in 2000, meaning most did not have WiFi, which was still a relatively new technology at the time. Wi-Fi is the wireless alternative to wired internet access. In 2000, households with internet access were connected almost entirely by wire, and most of those used dial-up over a telephone line; broadband (DSL or cable) was still uncommon in homes. In 2001, only 23% of hotel rooms offered broadband, but by 2004, half of all hotel rooms in the US offered broadband. Skype was one of the first software-based video chat services that offered free communication over the internet. Skype’s 2.0 Beta program in 2005 introduced video calling with a simplified interface. Was Tamagotchi the first “for-kids simulation” that was “a computer-tech device that ‘displayed the simulation’ via that device’s screen” & was available-for-purchase at many various stores? Wisdom is the capacity to accurately perceive, identify, and break down what one has observed, combined with the prudence and intentionality to apply that understanding in a way that effectively achieves beneficial or purposeful outcomes. Do children learning language have to translate (consciously or unconsciously) their pre-verbal thoughts/meanings/intentions into the words they’ve learned in order to produce articulated speech? Regarding non-digital, per individual, “an individual undergoing/‘having undergone’ a respawn” always is/was always impossible but, according to the religion Christianity, Jesus is/was the only exception in the relation that Jesus resurrected from being dead. Regarding non-digital, per individual, “an individual’s consciousness being a copy of an ‘individual’s original consciousness’ with that copy being that same ‘original individual/consciousness regarding the individual’s original consciousness’ always is/was always impossible.” “Just to get a clearer perspective, ‘if the word ‘truth’ can be used as a word for ‘living individuals’ as well as information”, then the sentence “she ‘gave birth at the hospital’ to a truth named Joe, her son” is a proper normal sentence’, correct? No. In standard English, “truth” is not a noun that refers to a living individual. It ordinarily refers to a fact, proposition, or the quality of being true. Therefore, the sentence “She gave birth at the hospital to a truth named Joe, her son.” would not be understood literally as meaning that Joe is a “truth” in the same sense that he is a son or a person. Most readers would interpret it as metaphorical, poetic, theological, or simply a nonstandard use of the word. By contrast, the conditional statement “If the word ‘truth’ can be used as a word for living individuals as well as information, then the sentence is a proper normal sentence.” is logically correct as a hypothetical. But without that hypothetical premise, the sentence is not a normal/accurate use of the word “truth” in English. What is a human’s memories stored as and are those memories stored as something physical that can be deciphered? “One’s consciousness, at all times, is anchored only to the form that said one’s thinking is part of a physical process associated with that form until ‘that physical process is no longer “functional regarding said one’s said ” physical form’ which results in that consciousness ‘not being anchored to a form whereby that consciousness’s thinking is part of a physical process’ any time soon”? Is “human brain transplant” possible and how would a brain not meet “what is required” to be able to accomplish “human brain transplant”? 1. The Core Concept A “human brain transplant” would mean taking the entire brain from one individual and placing it into another person’s body, ideally resulting in the brain retaining its consciousness, personality, and memories while the new body becomes functional under that brain’s control. In essence, it’s not really a “brain transplant”, but a “body transplant”—because the brain is the seat of identity, and it’s the body that’s being replaced. ️ 2. Why It’s Currently Impossible The primary reasons can be grouped into biological, neurological, and immunological barriers: A. Neural Reconnection • The spinal cord is composed of millions of nerve fibers transmitting signals between the brain and the body. • After cutting the spinal cord, no current surgical or bioengineering method can reattach and reestablish all those connections with the precision and functionality required. • Even with advanced microsurgery, reconnecting those axons (the brain’s output and input cables) is like trying to perfectly splice millions of microscopic wires, all while ensuring each wire reconnects with its original counterpart. • Some experimental work (like PEG fusion and stem-cell scaffolds) has shown partial reconnection in animals—but nothing close to full restoration of brain-body communication. B. Vascular & Metabolic Integration • The brain has extraordinarily high metabolic demands—roughly 20% of all the body’s oxygen and energy use. • To keep it alive, surgeons would need to reconnect all major arteries and veinsseamlessly in seconds to prevent hypoxia. • A delay of even a few minutes without blood supply leads to irreversible neuron death. C. Immune System Rejection • The body’s immune system would likely treat the transplanted brain as foreign tissue, or conversely, the brain’s own immune-protected environment (the blood–brain barrier) might react violently to the host’s immune system. • Unlike other organs, the brain’s immune privilege is unique and fragile; any mismatch could cause neuroinflammation, edema, or death. D. Electrochemical Incompatibility • The nervous system is not “plug-and-play.” • Every person’s neurochemical balance, neurotransmitter ratios, and receptor densities are unique and adapt over time to the specific body they inhabit. • Transplanting a brain into a foreign body would lead to mismatched feedback loops—the brain might interpret all sensory input, hormones, and motor signals as distorted, nonsensical, or overwhelming. E. Ethical & Identity Complexity • Philosophically and ethically, such a procedure challenges definitions of self, continuity, and death. • Whose consciousness would awaken—does the body’s genetic influence alter the mind? What if partial connection causes cognitive dissonance or new personalities? • Many countries ban research approaching this due to these unresolved ethical quandaries.