FFR & The Human Potential

[EAGAMES]

I'm holding a regular conversation of FFR with a fellow FFR member. Talking about how gay Club is, how the scoring system is unusual, and that we dislike it (I don't mind it). Suddenly, we're in a debate about how good one can get.

I'm going to post the conversation so you know how we got to where we got, and recognize where we both stand, and our views upon this topic.

It started like this...

I hate the scoring system on FFR. Totally shouldn't be based on combo.

I seen one guys profile the other day.
Some random guy I clicked on.
He FCed Southern Cross and on his RT was like "My best FCs: Southern Cross, Adventures of Lolo, blah blah blah" I was like "uhhhhhhhh..." looked at his replays... His Southern Cross replay had 1,000 boos on it, and I'm sure Adventures of Lolo looked just like it.


EAG says:
I think the scoring system is fine. I think all scoring systems are fine. You just need to get better. FCing songs aren't hard unless it's CP/DP (for most). Besides, it all comes down to who can get the best possible score. So, it doesn't really matter.

That's my point, though. On songs, like Adventures of Lolo, and stuff that are insane, people can button mash it all the way through and get a higher score than someone who got maybe 20 goods, but missed 2-3 times, and broke the combo 2-3 seperate times.

EAG says:
If he got 2/3 CBs, that member should whore Lolo, and would own the masher's scores. You saw how many people mashed Almost There, and got a Top 10 score?

Was about to start bragging.

Newp. I don't pay attention to scores.


EAG says:
You will once you get more competative, and better.


This is where the topic starts to develop...

Meh, I play for fun. This game isn't really like normal games. You could only get so good. Once you get there with the other handful of people, it's just who performs better on a given week that decides who gets a AAA first.


EAG says:
What?


There's a skill cap.


EAG says:
No. If there's a skill cap, how much better could I get?


Not much.


EAG says:
How much not much?

What do you want me to give you? A number I pull out my ass? I'm saying once you're able to consistently perform well on FGOs, FMOs, etc... you have the highest ability possible needed to AAA/FC anything new.
lol at first part.

EAG says:
So, I will never PFC CP because it's impossible due to a skill cap? Will I ever SDB DP while FCing?

That'd be so kewl if I could.

You already have the ability to do it.
I wish.

EAG says:
NO, LOL!!! OMG,you have no idea how hard that is...

srsly. >_>

its putting it all together for those 2 minutes or w/e

Okay... /sarcasm

You're right. I look at it that why, though it's kinda freakin impossible for me at the moment.

Very impossible.

You could only play a trill so many ways. You can only jack so many ways. Eventually, every song will be similar to other songs, or at least parts of it. It will be like putting it all together, and not making a mistake for 3 minutes. It's not that you can't do it. If you can do 32nd streams, no matter how many different 32nd streams from other songs, you have the ability to PFC them. All it comes down to is not making mistakes. It's like you, and the handful of other people that are av rank 1-10. All of you are the first one to SDG insane songs, AAA them, or whatever. The competition is about who can do it without making the mistake, not who can learn something new.

I need to learn how to do Club. =/

EAG says:
No. There are some songs that only two/three people in the world can pass. How are you supposed to do a 2/3 minute song of non-stop 64th jacks?

Random song that possibly doesn't exist.
That's the part where human abilities enter.

EAG says:
You have to LEARN how to do them.
It's impossible to just do them without knowing how to vibrate.

There's a point you reach where, no matter how hard you try, your body itself can't do it. It's like saying there's five more Michael Phelps out there that just have to learn how to do it. You can work your ass off, and come close, but there's a reason why only 2-3 can do a certain song because it's nearly inhuman, and is something that either comes somewhat naturally with a bit of work, or doesn't ever come.

No! I will probably suck at Club forever if this is true. T_T

EAG says:
It's not inhuman to learn how to vibrate 100x faster than 90% of the world (random statistics to get an idea). That's like saying it's inhumanly impossible to do streams. You have to have some type of gift in order to do basic ones. As long as you don't have any disabilities like carpal tunnel, or only two fingers you can do all these "inhuman" things. You just need loads of practice.

That'd suck if you had two fingers total.

Meh, I disagree, but we'll agree to disagree.

Indeed.

You know what, this debate sounds like it has potential to be an okay thread.

Epic* (maybe)

Lol. Just copy/paste our discussion in the thread. I'm scared to see what this will turn into. x.x

Did that.

... and I'm stopping here. Obviously, a fellow member (and a lot of people) has a fixed-mindset (you can only get so good), while I posses a growth-mindset (as long as you keep on practicing and have determination, you can get as good as you want).
_

I think we both hold good points (of course I think I'm right >_>), but what do YOU think about this? Is there really a skill cap that once you achieve you cannot pass? Or, do you think that, with practice and determination, you could keep progressing and become better, and better, and better?

Sorry if this isn't CT material. Perhaps Chit Chat? Also, making a poll as soon as I figure out how to make one. I have never created one. If you noticed, I used "FFR Member" as a cover up. Perhaps the member will be revealed later.

(This thread was created with the purpose to laugh at him, or him laughing at me for being wrong.)

[Oni-Paranoia]

HOLY SH*T thats a lot, i skimmed some of it, lol overall, ts jus the scoring system (if thats not mentioned above), but then yet if it was more like SM... it wouldnt be FFR right?
EDIT: You can always get better

[EAGAMES]

HOLY SH*T thats a lot, i skimmed some of it, lol overall, ts jus the scoring system (if thats not mentioned above), but then yet if it was more like SM... it wouldnt be FFR right?
EDIT: You can always get better

I think we both hold good points (of course I think I'm right >_>), but what do YOU think about this? Is there really a skill cap that once you achieve you cannot pass? Or, do you think that, with practice and determination, you could keep progressing and become better, and better, and better?

Don't tl;dr it. Also, yes it is a lot. Took me forever...

[meno_rocks123]

For some reason I thought of a LP when I was reading this.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Humans have a limit. It's impossible to keep improving. No human can become good enough to AAA a song that has 100 0-framers in a row per se.

I have a lot of people around me that are physically impaired. They are human too. But they can't FC VC songs. What about them? Do you think you can just casually say, "Oh, practice makes perfect!" in their face? I don't think so. They tell me how annoyed the get when people on this forum says, practice makes everything better.

I'm probably a human no different from you are. However, my left hand is physically impaired. My left cannot jack as fast as my right, due to my bone structures. My physical limitations probably worse than most other people. If someone tells me to jack faster with my left hand, I get seriously pissed, because it's impossible with my infrastructure.

I mean it when I say I think all people who think that "everyone can get better by practicing" are retarded ignorant imbeciles. I mean it. They have no idea what it's like to have a barrier so much lower than everyone else. People without arms cannot grow arms. People who lost fingers cannot have them back. People who have naturally impaired bone structures cannot fix them through "practice". Retarded.

NOTE: I am not saying don't practice. Practice is only a possibility. Not a certainty.

[hi19hi19]

Everybody has a different maximum potential, and nobody has actually acheived their maximum potential. So you can always get better, but you may not be able to go as far as someone else who is just naturally more able

[EAGAMES]

Humans have a limit. It's impossible to keep improving. No human can become good enough to AAA a song that has 100 0-framers in a row per se.
Obviously, though you could always keep on improving 1 miss less at a time. I think it is possible to AAA 100 0-framers per second, but it'd take too much time. A lot more than a lifetime could offer.
Everybody has a different maximum potential, and nobody has actually acheived their maximum potential. So you can always get better, but you may not be able to go as far as someone else who is just naturally more ableWouldn't that depend on how much time you set time aside, and if you have any physical problems that could be significant in the long run?

[Phynx]

Copying and pasting from what I told you in MSN EAG.



--->BTW, there is at some point a physical limit that no human is able to pass over. No human alive has reached it yet but there WILL at some point be a limit that no human can go past.

--->Physical actions are limited by physics.

[AOD_ELEMENT]

the scoring is fine, so adjust to it, and no way can everyone achieve what some of us have already done.

[Zageron]

How can you not like club! D:

BTW you whore you have 1 less good on AIM than me D:

[BigBoss37]

Everybody has a different maximum potential, and nobody has actually acheived their maximum potential. So you can always get better, but you may not be able to go as far as someone else who is just naturally more able

Yes this is good stuff.

[Phynx]

It's true EVERYONE has a different maximum limit in skill than anyone else, no one will ever reach that maximum but there is at SOME point in playing this that physics causes a solid limit to what a human in general can do. So yes there IS in fact a physical limit to what humans' can do.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Obviously, though you could always keep on improving 1 miss less at a time. I think it is possible to AAA 100 0-framers per second, but it'd take too much time.

Time does not solve everything. Humans are not perfect. Go back to the 18th century Enlightenment please. That's where you belong. It is physically impossible for the human mechanism to create and dispense energy that quickly in such an efficient manner. ATP does not provide enough energy, nor is there enough cells to generate that energy/motion. You can build muscle, but the more volume it takes up, the less efficient energy use becomes. Therefore, it is impossible.

[EAGAMES]

the scoring is fine, so adjust to it, and no way can everyone achieve what some of us have already done.
There's somethings that not everyone is up to the challenge. 99% of us will probably never become as good as some of those SM gods.
How can you not like club! D:

BTW you whore you have 1 less good on AIM than me D:
Club is gay. AIM is a homo to AAA. I was going to brag to you on MSN when I got that score, but that'd just be mean.

[AOD_ELEMENT]

It's true EVERYONE has a different maximum limit in skill than anyone else, no one will ever reach that maximum but there is at SOME point in playing this that physics causes a solid limit to what a human in general can do. So yes there IS in fact a physical limit to what humans' can do.

but what about that time where u get this crazy ass twitch in your hands and hit a 192nd trill when the max humans can do it like 64?
huh what about that rofl?

theres always a fluke where some miracle or impossible actions occur.

[Phynx]

but what about that time where u get this crazy ass twitch in your hands and hit a 192nd trill when the max humans can do it like 64?
huh what about that rofl?

Same physics concept applies.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

There's somethings that not everyone is up to the challenge. 99% of us will probably never become as good as some of those SM gods.

That is not just because we don't try. It is because for most, it is impossible.

[Oni-Paranoia]

but what about that time where u get this crazy ass twitch in your hands and hit a 192nd trill when the max humans can do it like 64?
huh what about that rofl?

theres always a fluke where some miracle or impossible actions occur.

Mathematically wut are the chances lol

[Sinael]

Mathematically wut are the chances lol

Well isn't there a saying in physics or something that says "If you try to walk through a wall a million times, eventually you will"?

[AOD_ELEMENT]

not chances, a miracle or completely out of the ordinary twitch lmfao

[Xx{Midday}xX]

The idea of a physical human limitation does not apply to just FFR nor humans. Just like it is impossible for anything to exceed the speed of light, there is a scientific limit to how fast the fastest human can run etc. There will probably come a time where no records are exceeded in the Olympics anymore, because there is a human limit. etc. Energy has to be converted, moved, and used. And all of that falls under the binding law of physics. 100 0-framers in a row is impossible. (100 is an arbitrary number. The actual number may be different, but I'm sure the calculations are very difficult to proceed with.)

[AOD_ELEMENT]

Well isn't there a saying in physics or something that says "If you try to walk through a wall a million times, eventually you will"?

damn dude that was good.

[Phynx]

BTW AOD, no "miracle" goes beyond the realms of physics. Just because someone does something out of pure luck that no other human has accomplished doesn't necessarily make it a "miracle" nor does it outbound the realm of physics.

[sc979]

I voted no only because some people do and some people don't. (Most do though. I probably should've voted yes, but I can't change it now.)

e: ahh got quoted before the edit.

[Phynx]

I voted no only because some people do and some people don't.

You evaded the point... blind man you are.

[Squeek]

Why the hell did you think this is Critical Thinking?

Moved.

Also, find better ways to make a point. Nobody wants to read that wall of text.

Edit: It looks like your point is basically "all humans could do the same thing if given enough time to practice"

Wrong. It's all based on genetics.

Also you people look exactly the same. Blue names, stupid chibi avatars, etc. Thought you oughta know. I can't differentiate between any of you.

[AOD_ELEMENT]

yeah i understand what your saying but im saying what about the time things happen that nobody can ever explain?

[Phynx]

yeah i understand what your saying but im saying what about the time things happen that nobody can ever explain?

Explanations can AND WILL explain them... people just SAY they can't explain it because of the initial shock of doing it. Pure luck is what I'd call it.

[AOD_ELEMENT]

im talking not only about ffr but like a miracle something that nobody can explain accurately without having proof because things like that happen all the time just like people coming back to life after pronounced dead. they did something impossible came back to life that no other humans can do. its a fluke in humans that has no explanation

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Why the hell did you think this is Critical Thinking?

Moved.

Also, find better ways to make a point. Nobody wants to read that wall of text.

Edit: It looks like your point is basically "all humans could do the same thing if given enough time to practice"

Wrong. It's all based on genetics.

Also you people look exactly the same. Blue names, stupid chibi avatars, etc. Thought you oughta know. I can't differentiate between any of you.

Thank you very much. This is as direct as you can get with the OP. And I find those avatars ridiculous as well.

Time does not solve everything. If you try to circumvent this reality by saying, "You can change your genetics... etc," then we have to define what you mean by the term "you" as reference to one certain person.

Oh wait, this is chit chat now. <_> boring.

[MilkChan]

Combo scoring is ridiculous and should be removed. Someone could get a score of 500-1-0-1-0 but if that CB was at like 250 combo your score will end up keeping you in the high hundreds rank instead of top 200 or lower, as an example.

also there's no limit all it takes to be good now is to vibrate rofl

[Xx{Midday}xX]

As for the complaint on the combo system: that is the definition of FFR. FFR should stay FFR and retain its major concepts and differences from other similar games. People who don't like the combo system don't like FFR. That is all.

[MilkChan]

because not liking one thing means not liking all of it. right.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

because not liking one thing means not liking all of it. right.

One of FFR's major concepts. I didn't see the need to state the obvious. I mean the only reason people who don't like the combo system are here, is because that dislike is minor as compared to the rest of FFR's concepts.

[Izzy]

Everyone is different. The songs can get infinitely harder and not everyone can get infinitely better. Some people are going to be able to get better then others no matter what. Same as any other sport.

[who_cares973]

Well isn't there a saying in physics or something that says "If you try to walk through a wall a million times, eventually you will"? string theory ftw


but yea everyone has their physical limits




stupid chibi avatars, etc.

And I find those avatars ridiculous as well.


that hurts ;__;

[Patashu]

string theory ftw
ah no
quantum mechanics describes, surprise surprise quantum level effects, your body is not an isolated system (aka it partakes in interactions) and therefore no quantum effects for you
and string theory has even less to do with it

also there is a hard skill cap related to the amount of matter and useful work available in the visible universe and how it can be best arranged into the perfect stepmania player and respective keyboard/computer

none of you will ever hit this but it's there (and rapidly decreasing as the universe expands)

[Kynosaur]

"If you try to walk through a wall a million times, eventually you will"

K, have fun with that.

My opinion on this topic is the human physical skill cap is constantly being lowered, no matter how slow, by pollution, foresting etc lowering the amount of oxygen in the air which prevents the respiratory system from working as well as it would be able to. eg Midday's reference to the Olympic Games. Less oxygen = less efficient respiratory system = poorer performance.

[Squeek]

Which is why nobody in the Olympics broke any records this year, right?

Do you seriously believe what you're writing?

Anyway, Olympic records will continue to be broken. Prodigies who are in the right place at the right time will always show up. We learn more and more about the human body every day, and training procedures get better and better as a result. We know what muscles to exercise for exactly how many minutes a day to achieve optimum performance. But science doesn't stop, and this knowledge will soon become a thing of the past. Bolt proved this year that records people thought nobody could beat can be easily broken. And oh he did it in a poor air quality environment with a little bit of a headwind.

I can't even begin to imagine that people think humans are less productive because of this notion of slightly less oxygen to breathe. Species learn to adapt to changes in climate. We have, and we can continue to adapt to these slight variations over time.

[Kynosaur]

Do you seriously believe what you're writing?

No, I just decided it would be fun to try and throw you off the scent.

>.>

[danny53x]

I really don't know about skill caps, because I feel lightyears away from the brink of my potential. I feel that the more you play, the better you get. You recognize the patterns more easily, and your accuracy only rises, especially if you play on a higher judgment. I feel like there's always room for improvement.

[L0NEvvolf]

As you get better your sure to slow down, in the rate at which you improve, but I believe there is always room for improvement.

[jellygod]

i have to agree to some extent that there is always room for improvement, but you can only improve so much. its kind of like ffr playing styles, for insanely good one handers playing 1 handed is natural, i know that there is no way in hell no matter how much i played one handed, tens of thousands of games... could i ever become good at it, same with me and spread.. my left handed just isnt coordinated so no matter how much practice i did i dont think i could get any good, index is right for me. some people are just naturally better at this game and everyone has to deal with that, but there is always room for a little improvement no matter what style is your forte.

[EAGAMES]

Why the hell did you think this is Critical Thinking?

Moved.

Also, find better ways to make a point. Nobody wants to read that wall of text.

Edit: It looks like your point is basically "all humans could do the same thing if given enough time to practice"

Wrong. It's all based on genetics.

Also you people look exactly the same. Blue names, stupid chibi avatars, etc. Thought you oughta know. I can't differentiate between any of you.
1.) If you read the small print at the bottom, it says along the lines that I'm sorry if this isn't CT.
2.) Thanks for the move.
3.) You could always go down to the last paragraph. Sorry for not stating that you could at the beginning.
4.) I respect that.
5.)Yes. >_>

Also, sorry if anyone got offended by this thread. Obviously it was not my intention, and I don't see why anyone would, but one member did and I'm guessing a couple more did, too. Perhaps one thought I said that anyone even with disabilites can get as good as someone without ones, but I didn't say. I said everyone excluding the ones with disabilites.

I just wanted to clarify that.

[ledwix]

Skill is clearly an asymptotic function in FFR.
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7537/asymptoticskillgraphjv3.png

For each person it's different, so there basically is a limit to human potential. The limit, of course, depends on raw talent and genetics.

[OrganisM]

Highest average rank should be the number one overall rank, rather than just points, but that's just me I guess.

As for scoring, those who FC won't do as well as those who AAA, obviously. The best players will AAA, so the argument is moot.

[Izzy]

ffr is a bad indicator of anything, accuracy isn't even a factor. We would have to be talking about stepmania to get anywhere.

[OrganisM]

Err, the whole point is FFR. FFR is not Stepmania, nor was it ever meant to be as far as I understand it. FFR is FFR, so when we talk about potential on FFR, we're not talking about Stepmania.

[Izzy]

Were talking about human potential. FFR was meant to be ddr, and stepmania was meant to be ddr. End of discussion. They are similar whether you like it or not.

[OrganisM]

They are not the same thing, and they've evolved into different things. Much that applies to FFR does not apply to Stempania, and vice versa.

[[TeRa]]

I've been saying it for years, I don't believe there is a skill cap in anything, records will continue to be broken, we will never get to a point where no records are physically impassible.

I don't believe there will be a point where you just completely stop getting better.

Maybe there is a limit, but even if there is, no one will ever be that good, which makes it feel like there is no limit in skill.

[Mookage]

Well a while back I actually thought I had reached my maximum. That's why I left for 2-3 months. But then I just felt like I hadn't reached my full potential, and now I destroy scores that I thought were amazing back then with "awwww that sucked" scores of today.

It's all about effort; if you will it and work at it you can improve no matter what.

This is what I believe anyway.

[Izzy]

They are not the same thing, and they've evolved into different things. Much that applies to FFR does not apply to Stempania, and vice versa.

Everything that applies to ffr applies to stepmania except it's better and there's more of it.

No one here has mentioned that we are talking about human potential that only pertains to hitting notes really fast under a limit of 30 frames per second and in a timing window of 2 frames per second.

[OrganisM]

So FFR is exactly the same as Stepmania.

k.

[Izzy]

They are similar whether you like it or not.

You are really paranoid aren't you. This isn't even anything to argue about. Nothing i have said is even debatable.

[OrganisM]

You make it sound as if there's no difference, that's all.

I'm not paranoid, though I appreciate the snide remark; it makes you really clever.

[Izzy]

I didn't say that or imply that. What you get out of my text is up to your personal judgment.

[Kynosaur]

2 frames per second.

Tass said in a recent thread that the perfect window was 3 frames. Now I'm confused :(

[Izzy]

I would trust him on that more then me. It is probably 3 frames per second then.

[OrganisM]

I didn't say that or imply that. What you get out of my text is up to your personal judgment.

I was saying that the degree of similarity is not as strong as you implied it to be, and that there were some fundamental differences. You implied more similarity than I did. Are you really going to argue that point?

[Izzy]

I am not arguing. I am telling you because you are wrong. I don't care what the games look like. You are hitting 4 arrows on both of them.

The physical and mental aspects of the game are very similar if not the same, ffr just lacks accuracy and quality.

[[TeRa]]

It's a 30 FPS game.
There are 3 perfect window, 3 good windows, and 1 av window.
In total, there are 7 frames in which you can hit an arrow, which is 7/30ths of a second.

[OrganisM]

I am not arguing. I am telling you because you are wrong. I don't care what the games look like. You are hitting 4 arrows on both of them.

The physical and mental aspects of the game are very similar if not the same, ffr just lacks accuracy and quality.

The feel of the game is entirely different. That's like saying racquetball and tennis are the same game because you hit a ball around.

You have a very strong sense of wrong and right; too bad you have no sense in general.

I don't have arguments. I only make corrections, because I am always right.

Seriously, how ****ing arrogant is that?

[Izzy]

I didn't say that or imply that. What you get out of my text is up to your personal judgment.
I don't know where you are getting that, but in this case i am only making a very simple statement that is true and not debatable. Sorry.

[OrganisM]

Anything is debatable, but nevermind that. It's alright. Don't you worry, there's no such thing as disagreements here. Everything will be okay, and everyone will agree. No silly business like difference of opinion. That can lead to arguments, and that would be very bad. People could get hurt that way. Maybe it's best if we all just believe the same thing. Yes, black and white thinking is best.

[Nightfirecat]

It's true EVERYONE has a different maximum limit in skill than anyone else, no one will ever reach that maximum but there is at SOME point in playing this that physics causes a solid limit to what a human in general can do. So yes there IS in fact a physical limit to what humans' can do.

What he said. Physics puts a limit on how much movement we as humans can put into FFR/SM, so eventually, yes, we will be stopped from improving, but it's so hard to get there, that nobody has done it... yet.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

What he said. Physics puts a limit on how much movement we as humans can put into FFR/SM, so eventually, yes, we will be stopped from improving, but it's so hard to get there, that nobody has done it... yet.

It is possible to calculate scientifically/mathematically how well you will do on the next run if the movement of all energy/mass forms within the entire system (body, external information etc.) are comprehended. Of course, it is not humanly or technologically possible to do that, but what I am saying is, there is always a limit. That limit is already predetermined by the flow of all energy and mass.

If I may say so further, the entire future is already predestined. Not by terms of divine fate or some kind of unknown metaphysical power, but by actual physics, and the motion of all mass and energy. If the motion of all forms of mass and energy throughout the universe could be calculated instantaneously through the knowledge of basic physics/chemistry, you can predict everything that will happen in the universe for the entire future. Once again, not humanly or technologically possible, but nothing can change the motion of forces (unless if you truly believe that divine intervention/metaphysical power exists... but even they are caused by something, and act in reaction to something else, which could be calculated as well). Unpredictable is a term that coincides with humanly/technologically unpredictable, but if all laws of the universe were completely understood, and could be instantaneously calculated, there is nothing that is unpredictable. Everything is caused by something else, and everything causes something else. That cause/effect relationship follows a strict rule, and everything is predetermined in that sense. There are no uncertainty factors when you get down to the smallest degree of physical comprehension.

There is a limit. Done.

There are threads about human will etc. as well, but I obviously believe that human will is nothing more than another factor that is caused by something, and produces something else. Your "choice" is caused by external information which triggers internal functions, which creates a result. There is no "free will" in the sense that you can transcend the laws of physics in making your own decision.

The terms "possibility/probability" are terms that evaluate human/technological uncertainties. Everything is always 100% positively going to happen. We just don't have the means of calculating it that far, which leaves us with human/technological uncertainties.

Down with the science. You cannot change your future. If you think you are changing your future, science is doing it for you in a manner that coincides with what you want. It's an illusion. If you want to feel almighty and invincible, go ahead and think that humans are limitless. That's just how weak humans are. Which is why I hate them (and me. I am human too.) and this worldly system.

I'm not saying optimism is a bad thing. I'm not saying that thinking you will do better next time is a bad thing. Optimism is just another effect from another cause. Human emotion and thought process are both another of infinite effects caused by our internal mechanisms and external influence. I am saying that these thoughts are ok UNDER THE GIVEN KNOWLEDGE that you and every part of you are just a small itty bitty effect of numerous effects that flow under the law of science. Humans are not invincible, supernatural, or divine. Every single thing that you can think of, including your thoughts, why the sky is blue, why I'm typing this, why you're reading this, and why you just got 3024 0 0 1 on Pants, is all a series of completely unchangeable effects of the flow of physics from the start of the universal system/flow.

Hello CT.

The term "divine power" comes in ONLY when the beginning of universal law is explained, because it is unexplainable as to how this system/flow was started/created. Which is why blaming "God" for the cause of everything isn't completely irrelevant, because the definition of "God" is the cause of the universal flow. "God" does not act "now". "God" acted in the beginning of the universe. "God" is a concept. "God" is a term given to nothing human, nothing with shape form or function. "God" is a mere idea that fills in the incomprehensible origin of the universal flow under which we are trapped as entities no different from a nearby air molecule, or a picoscopic string, or the motion of the galaxies.

The universe is a string of causes. The warp of space caused a picoscopic string to move. A picoscopic string caused the movement of another picoscopic string. The group of picoscopic strings caused the movement of a quark. The group of quarks caused the movement of a subatomic particle. The group of subatomic particles caused the movement of an atom. The group of atoms caused the movement of a molecule. The group of molecules caused the movement of an organism's thought process. The thought process caused a physical reaction. The physical reaction caused another entity to respond. That response causes another response. Eternal cycle, until the last cause causes its own destruction. But, destruction is another cause for something perhaps not comprehensible on these planes of dimensions. You can go on and on about the possibilities, but I'm a mere human, without the ability to comprehend all of the universe at once. Which is why I can only speculate. Which is why there are uncertainties.

I should stop editing now, because I'm repeating the same thing over and over again from a different perspective.

[ledwix]

It is possible to calculate scientifically/mathematically how well you will do on the next run if the movement of all energy/mass forms within the entire system (body, external information etc.) are comprehended. Of course, it is not humanly or technologically possible to do that, but what I am saying is, there is always a limit. That limit is already predetermined by the flow of all energy and mass.

If I may say so further, the entire future is already predestined. Not by terms of divine fate or some kind of unknown metaphysical power, but by actual physics, and the motion of all mass and energy. If the motion of all forms of mass and energy throughout the universe could be calculated instantaneously through the knowledge of basic physics/chemistry, you can predict everything that will happen in the universe for the entire future. Once again, not humanly or technologically possible, but nothing can change the motion of forces (unless if you truly believe that divine intervention/metaphysical power exists... but even they are caused by something, and act in reaction to something else, which could be calculated as well). Unpredictable is a term that coincides with humanly/technologically unpredictable, but if all laws of the universe were completely understood, and could be instantaneously calculated, there is nothing that is unpredictable. Everything is caused by something else, and everything causes something else. That cause/effect relationship follows a strict rule, and everything is predetermined in that sense. There are no uncertainty factors when you get down to the smallest degree of physical comprehension.



There is a limit. Done.

There are threads about human will etc. as well, but I obviously believe that human will is nothing more than another factor that is caused by something, and produces something else. Your "choice" is caused by external information which triggers internal functions, which creates a result. There is no "free will" in the sense that you can transcend the laws of physics in making your own decision.

The terms "possibility/probability" are terms that evaluate human/technological uncertainties. Everything is always 100% positively going to happen. We just don't have the means of calculating it that far, which leaves us with human/technological uncertainties.

Down with the science. You cannot change your future. If you think you are changing your future, science is doing it for you in a manner that coincides with what you want. It's an illusion. If you want to feel almighty and invincible, go ahead and think that humans are limitless. That's just how weak humans are. Which is why I hate them (and me. I am human too.) and this worldly system.

The term "divine power" comes in ONLY when the beginning of universal law is explained, because it is unexplainable as to how this system/flow was started/created. Which is why blaming "God" for the cause of everything isn't completely irrelevant, because the definition of "God" is the cause of the universal flow. "God" does not act "now". "God" acted in the beginning of the universe. "God" is a concept. "God" is a term given to nothing human, nothing with shape form or function. "God" is a mere idea that fills in the incomprehensible origin of the universal flow under which we are trapped as entities no different from a nearby air molecule, or a picoscopic string, or the motion of the galaxies.

Well, goodness, I suppose this is the year 2238492784927942742374 already? Even if it was the year 90000000000000999990000 times a googolplex to the googolplex power, we still wouldn't have figured everything out. How do you gain all knowledge of every single particle? You'd have to find the properties of all material imaginable, and to do that, you'd have to search and examine every last shred of matter in the universe. Not only would you have to examine every existent animal under a microscope, but get to the bottom of what the soul is, or lack thereof in your understanding, probably; basically what it is that keeps our desires and emotions going in the states of going in and out of consciousness. I understand your position, but to be using such an immensely humanistic perspective at this primitive day an age is a little arrogant. We can't yet predict our futures. It's really, really interesting that you believe our futures are predestined. I sort of believe it, too, except I still believe we have the free will to shape our own destinies, and that thinking about what our destiny might be is a complete paradox that only distracts us.

And even if we were to somehow traverse everything and study everything to within quantum range, that's still enormous. We know that observing stuff messes with the results, so there's gotta be complete uncertainty with anything smaller than a photon. And of course, if we want to know the position/location of every particle, then the photon becomes a gigantic distraction. And besides, the fact that we're observing it ourselves leads us to foggy conclusions. We'd have to know about ourselves too and assume a completely humanistic philosophy. There aren't any laws of physics, nor will there ever be time for us to discover them, that tell us how we make every single decision under our own free will, while the 99.99999etc% of matter can't make its own decisions.

I don't think our decisions are particularly controlled by laws of physics or that we are acting in a completely reactionary fashion 100% of the time. I can choose to walk up the stairs regularly or walk up backwards, walk up on my hands, hop each step, run up and down the steps 20 times and be late to class, etc. And there would be no indication that either behavior were necessary, nor any prediction we could formulate any time soon. Even if I was not bored at all, didn't feel like getting a workout, was tired and lazy, there was no one around to watch, or tons of people around to watch, I could do any of those things at my own discretion, without exception. Expect extinction long before we can think about that, if it's even possible.


And well, if causes go back infinitely (true infinity, not potential infinity), then we don't exist right now. But we do.

[robertsona]

POLLS ARE ALL TIED UP
ps ill never get good at ffr

[igotrhythm]

Everybody has a different maximum potential, and nobody has actually achieved their maximum potential. So you can always get better, but you may not be able to go as far as someone else who is just naturally more able.

Was going to read the entire thread, but hi19 just summed up my point.

While I don't doubt that some songs like CP may never be AAAed, the fact that one can improve with practice has driven me to accomplish things I never thought I could do (I still remember the days where I had a mental block on Boss Machine at about 100 combo while going for the FC, but lo and behold, I've AAAed it), but there will always be someone better than me.

On the other hand, every test has a ceiling, and I'm sure some of us remember the days when Rubix had the top rank on every public song in the game and we hailed him as the new king of FFR, but that was before Shash made his epic comeback.

To sum up, there's a reason that the US Army's motto used to go something like "Be all that you can be" instead of "Be the best." Everyone has a different ceiling, and some of us, like myself, may have reached it without attaining the heights that people like Jimerax have.

By the way, I voted "no" in the poll. If I believed even for one minute that events beyond my control could limit how good I could get at something, I'd go insane before I even gave it a shot.

[ledwix]

In response to that, I think Midday's point about there being a definite destiny for every one of us is a valid one. There's a limit for everyone, but it's unknown. Your genetics are obviously beyond your control, and so are the laws that govern how your fingers, eyes, and brain move and work. So while the limit is not infinite, but finite and clearly defined somewhere off in the distance, it is unknown and therefore useless to think about. Think of it as potentially infinite, but certainly not actually infinite. But there is definitely some set unknown limit to how much skill anyone can gain anywhere.

[Patashu]

btw

I don't know if skill increase is asymptotic because someone always seems to be getting better

there's a limit but it's a function of the perfect configuration of both stepmania player and computer using all the matter and useful work in the visible universe so no one will ever reach it
given that we're still humans and still using electronic computers and all we have for matter and energy is the earth and steady input from the sun we're not even close

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Well, goodness, I suppose this is the year 2238492784927942742374 already? Even if it was the year 90000000000000999990000 times a googolplex to the googolplex power, we still wouldn't have figured everything out. How do you gain all knowledge of every single particle? You'd have to find the properties of all material imaginable, and to do that, you'd have to search and examine every last shred of matter in the universe. Not only would you have to examine every existent animal under a microscope, but get to the bottom of what the soul is, or lack thereof in your understanding, probably; basically what it is that keeps our desires and emotions going in the states of going in and out of consciousness. I understand your position, but to be using such an immensely humanistic perspective at this primitive day an age is a little arrogant. We can't yet predict our futures. It's really, really interesting that you believe our futures are predestined. I sort of believe it, too, except I still believe we have the free will to shape our own destinies, and that thinking about what our destiny might be is a complete paradox that only distracts us.

And even if we were to somehow traverse everything and study everything to within quantum range, that's still enormous. We know that observing stuff messes with the results, so there's gotta be complete uncertainty with anything smaller than a photon. And of course, if we want to know the position/location of every particle, then the photon becomes a gigantic distraction. And besides, the fact that we're observing it ourselves leads us to foggy conclusions. We'd have to know about ourselves too and assume a completely humanistic philosophy. There aren't any laws of physics, nor will there ever be time for us to discover them, that tell us how we make every single decision under our own free will, while the 99.99999etc% of matter can't make its own decisions.

I don't think our decisions are particularly controlled by laws of physics or that we are acting in a completely reactionary fashion 100% of the time. I can choose to walk up the stairs regularly or walk up backwards, walk up on my hands, hop each step, run up and down the steps 20 times and be late to class, etc. And there would be no indication that either behavior were necessary, nor any prediction we could formulate any time soon. Even if I was not bored at all, didn't feel like getting a workout, was tired and lazy, there was no one around to watch, or tons of people around to watch, I could do any of those things at my own discretion, without exception. Expect extinction long before we can think about that, if it's even possible.


And well, if causes go back infinitely (true infinity, not potential infinity), then we don't exist right now. But we do.

I said it was humanly impossible <_<

The choice that you make is caused by a chemical reaction. Chemical reactions are not caused by your own "will" unless if you believe that you have some supernatural force that controls the law of physics and causes some chemicals to go that way to react so you can make that exact decision. All decision-making is scientifically induced. Decision-making is a mere motion of electric signals in the brain that react to the environment/given situation.

If the cause of an original loop is a cycle, then there you have a not infinite yet infinite causality process there. Therefore, I believe that "existence" is perpetual. Existence is generated by nothing, yet it maintains itself. Perfect example of perpetual property.

[ledwix]

If existence is perpetual, then it's an infinite spiral. The cycle still has to start somewhere, though, doesn't it? Since time appears linear 100% of the time in our common perception of it, (and has never appeared cyclical in any understanding of the dimension) then if it is indeed cyclical there must be some substantial indicator as to why that is the case, even contrary to popular evidence. If we are to take this idea at face value, then we must still ponder when time, the proposed "curled up" dimension, starts over. At what points, then, does time "start over?" And if time does start over, then we should see a cosmos that has the potential to collapse. Also, if existence is generated by nothing, then nothing should also be able to be generated by existence. In other words, matter can be created and destroyed, not just created, which would invoke instability in any cyclical universe theory.

And if choice is nothing more than a complicated version of some chemical components reacting, we must be able to gauge what choice every single person will make in every single case, without exception. If for the sake of realism it's possible to devise such a theory, it would take much longer than we have time for. I think we'll die out as a species in the next few thousand years due to wars and stuff. Even if we had eons, it still might not be enough time.

For clarification, a supernatural force does not have to directly intervene with chemicals in order for a person to still have free will. In fact, complete free will and dualism outside of the realm of humanism doesn't quite necessitate a deity. But eh, I hope I didn't ignore any of your points. Really tired now, sorry if I did.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

If existence is perpetual, then it's an infinite spiral. The cycle still has to start somewhere, though, doesn't it? Since time appears linear 100% of the time in our common perception of it, (and has never appeared cyclical in any understanding of the dimension) then if it is indeed cyclical there must be some substantial indicator as to why that is the case, even contrary to popular evidence. If we are to take this idea at face value, then we must still ponder when time, the proposed "curled up" dimension, starts over. At what points, then, does time "start over?" And if time does start over, then we should see a cosmos that has the potential to collapse.

And if choice is nothing more than a complicated version of some chemical components reacting, we must be able to gauge what choice every single person will make in every single case, without exception. If for the sake of realism it's possible to devise such a theory, it would take much longer than we have time for. I think we'll die out as a species in the next few thousand years due to wars and stuff. Even if we had eons, it still might not be enough time.

For clarification, a supernatural force does not have to directly intervene with chemicals in order for a person to still have free will. In fact, complete free will and dualism outside of the realm of humanism doesn't quite necessitate a deity.

supernatural=transcends nature, ie the scientific laws of reasoning or the restrictions of physical limitation. i am not talking about divination or religion.

I am not saying humans will be able to predict the future using science. Humans are stupid. No can do.

I am only using the example of choice, as an effect of environmental situation/internal bodily processes, to demonstrate my understanding of predestination.

Free will does not exist. What seems like free will is caused only by the interaction of matter and energy.

If you are saying that free will is NOT matter or energy, then you are saying it is supernatural. I am saying humans are NOT supernatural. If you agree with me that free will is part of matter or energy, then you are agreeing with me that it is subject to physical law.

Hi ledwix. =)

As for existence being perpetual: That came out of nowhere. I don't have anything to support this idea. It is more like a whimsical expression of feeling.

[ledwix]

Right, I see where I messed up. Supernatural forces in general, then, do exist, in my opinion, regarding an animal's ability to use reason. I know we are still really primitive and all, but there are certain properties of the mind that diverge completely with the brain.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Right, I see where I messed up. Supernatural forces in general, then, do exist, in my opinion, regarding an animal's ability to use reason. I know we are still really primitive and all, but there are certain properties of the mind that diverge completely with the brain.

Allow me to express a theory I thought of about a year or two ago, of how humans possess a parallel self which exists in a paradimensional world. That parallel entity is a supernatural entity that exists outside the boundaries of physical comprehension. This is what causes "free will". Like you said, the "mind" (lets use this term to label this parallel entity) is a supernatural force that diverges completely with the physical brain.

However, there needs to be a link between this supernatural force and the physical body. There are a few things that support this idea. Dreams: the expression of the mind inside the physical body. Imagination: the split-second influence the mind has during the intense activity of the physical body. Through both of these, you can sense what the mind wants you to sense, whether it be sight, sound, etc.

You can go all over the place with this idea, and I never thought it was a bad idea either. The only reason I dropped this, was because it went nowhere else.

The mind itself is supernatural, but the body it controls is not. Hence, the mind cannot cause any supernatural events through the body, unless if the mind makes the body supernatural as well. Hence, ghosts and spectres are minds without bodies. That is why ghosts and spectres are considered supernatural. Whether the existence of ghosts are generally accepted or not is up to majority, but I myself believe in them. There are direct proofs of their physical influences in everyday life.

I hope you read my edits =)

I need to sleep now. Interesting conversation... but I will be back at around 4AM EST.

I can write a 400 page novel about both theories... trust me. Tackling every flaw I find, depicting every aspect of the theory. =) I find these conversations fascinating above all else.

[Patashu]

intellectualism itt

[ledwix]

You really should write that stuff up. I used to rant about stuff like that too. Got to like 60 single space pages, but the ideas were still really incomplete. I left them back home, wish i still had em ><

[Kekeb]

How about we keep the pessimistic views on humanity bull **** out of this thread. The last thing I want to see when viewing an innocent thread is how our species sucks.

EDIT: Not to trot on the intelligent conversation, but seriously.

EDIT: lol i didn't see this one:
I am not saying humans will be able to predict the future using science. Humans are stupid. No can do.

EDIT: The poll is misleading,
"Is there an invisible skill cap that everyone could achieve?"
There really is two questions, can everyone achieve a certain skill level, and is there an invisible skill cap.

[Izzy]

can everyone achieve a certain skill level
no


Is there an invisible skill cap.
yes

[TC_Halogen]

I think this simply goes back to the aspects mentioned earlier, every person has a physical limitation where they can only improve to a certain level. Eventually, each person has their "peak".

[Xx{Midday}xX]

How about we keep the pessimistic views on humanity bull **** out of this thread. The last thing I want to see when viewing an innocent thread is how our species sucks.

EDIT: Not to trot on the intelligent conversation, but seriously.

Pessimism is as equal in value as optimism. I'm very certain that no one can be absolutely neither.

I may sound pessimistic, but I don't see why I can't state my opinions on the subject. Are you saying that humans can transcend the laws of physics then? If so, be able to control it?

I believe my points are valid interpretations of my surroundings and knowledge.

If we consider humans and humans only, I agree with Halogen, but the same concept can be applied to the rest of the universe.

"It is a good thing that we (humans) exist." This is optimism.
"We (humans) can do anything." This is stupidity.

[Kekeb]

"We (humans) can do anything." This is stupidity.
That seems like a motivation technique, if anything at all. In no way should a quote like that be taken at face value.
So I do slightly agree.