/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10854415]

Is a near photographic/eidetic memory teachable If so, how?

[Anonymous No.10854468]

>>10854415
Less traumatic, more correct, the memories are.

You won't remember stuff if everybody is getting bullshit at you, but you will if you ware right since beginning of memories.

[Anonymous No.10854668]

Method of loci, memory palace

[Anonymous No.10854690]

>>10854415
Read Joshua Foer's book 'Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything'. It's a great book covering a ton of information about memory sport and learning to strengthen your memory. While writing the book and interviewing people... he actually learned techniques and eventually WON the 2006 US Memory Championship... and he had virtually zero experience in that kind of memory sport before. It's a great book.

[Anonymous No.10854691]

>>10854668
Yep... those are covered pretty extensively in 'Moonwalking with Einstein'.

[Anonymous No.10855407]

>>10854415
Practice memorizing things, DO NOT rely on crutches like method of loci, push your self to memorize more and faster.
The big breaklthrough happens when you train up your long term memory to writing speeds equal to the bandwith of human speech.

[Anonymous No.10855585]

>>10854415
It's a genetic abnormality and usually comes at the expense of impaired symbolic manipulation. Temple Grandin is a good example. The bandwidth between her optic nerve and vision center is something like 1.7x normal.

Con artists cottoned on to the idea and learned to emulate it for profit.

[Anonymous No.10855996]

>>10855585
plz gib moar info

[Anonymous No.10856607]

>>10855585
It isn't impaired, the others have it impaired, as illustrated by failing the task in the image. The western culture expects you to have the flaw, otherwise you are basically autistic as your brain filters out other people's hints as meaningless noise (as it should have). It's only a problem because the western culture expects you to have this flaw and abuse it to "politely" talk about a lot of things that makes it a problem, in other cultures it's never a problem. (It is in fact those who do have it who have trouble with interpersonal skills)

[Anonymous No.10856610]

>>10855585
It isn't impaired, the others have it impaired, as illustrated by failing the task in the image. The western culture expects you to have the flaw, otherwise you are basically autistic as your brain filters out other people's hints as meaningless noise (as it should). It's only a problem because the western culture expects you to have this flaw and the virtual requirement to use it to "politely" talk about a lot of things that makes it a problem, in other cultures it's never a problem. (It is in fact those who do have it who may have trouble)

[Anonymous No.10856612]

>>10856607
outside of east asia most humans will fail to answer that question correctly but I can guarantee whites and ashkenazi jews come far closer to the success rate of ne asians than nignogs

[Anonymous No.10856614]

>>10855585
It isn't impaired, the others have it impaired, as illustrated by failing the task in the image. The western culture expects you to have the flaw, otherwise you are basically autistic as your brain filters out other people's hints as meaningless noise (as it should). It's only a problem because the western culture expects you to have this flaw and the virtual requirement to use it to "politely" talk about a lot of things that makes it a problem, in other cultures it's never a problem. (It is in fact those who do have it who may have trouble)

[Anonymous No.10856617]

>>10856612
sorry rfor deleting, it's a reply to this>>10856614

Do you have data about other areas? Do Africans make the same error?

[Anonymous No.10856619]

>>10856617
its a fucking intelligence test question you can infer how subsaharans would perform from previous data. east asians probably fare somewhat better than white euros but not by a lot

[Anonymous No.10856625]

>>10856619
It isn't intelligence test, it's a test if your thinking is fucked up. It is deliberately simple to make IQ not important.

[Anonymous No.10856643]

>>10856614
A and 7

[Anonymous No.10856661]

>>10856643
Correct. Whites tend to answer A and 3, which is completely wrong.

[Anonymous No.10856666]

>>10856661
>>10856643
>>10856619
>>10856614
The problem is that those who have it expect others have it too, and find it extremely funny if you don't "get" the nonexistent meanings in what you say and basically consider you retarded for that single reason alone regardless of how intelligent you are otherwise.
It's probably how the Nazis came up with the Arayn race as those who have it as opposed to those who don't.

[Anonymous No.10856669]

>>10856661 (You)
>>10856643
>>10856619
>>10856614 (You)
The problem is that those who have it expect others have it too, and find it extremely funny if you don't "get" the nonexistent meanings in what they say and basically consider you retarded for that single reason alone regardless of how intelligent you are otherwise.
It's probably how the Nazis came up with the Aryan race as those who have it as opposed to those who don't.

[Anonymous No.10856677]

>>10856661
what a weird way to cope

[Anonymous No.10856682]

>>10856661
I probably only got it right due to writing out endless truth tables in logic class for CS lol

[Anonymous No.10856748]

>>10856614
A and 3 need to be turned over, I'd imagine.

>>10856643
I don't get it. You haven't verified that A always occurs with 3 if you don't flip the 3. Nor is it stated that these symbols are uniquely mapped, therefore 7 or D mapping to anything proves nothing.

Explain.

[Anonymous No.10856773]

>>10856748
3 doesn't tell you anything, regardless if there is A or any other letter, the rule still holds. If there is A on the 7, the rule is broken.

>>10856677
No it isn't. See the other post? The people are basically mentally ill, their ability to exclude those who are not like them is their only strength. They cannot understand anything real, only thier own social world and things they copied from other people (who they only mock and hate in return). It's basically a green beard gene in practice.

[Anonymous No.10856792]

>>10856748
Implications are false only when the antecedent is true and the consequent is false. So who cares about the 3. The 7 on the other hand better not have an A on the flip side.

[Anonymous No.10856797]

>>10854415
Source - Neuroscience of Intelligence

Photographic memory belongs to those with Static not fluid intelligence
These people tend to have LOW IQs, and need help in their daily life.
They can read 100 books, but have no idea how to use the knowledge.
We have those already, theyre called computers

[Anonymous No.10856804]

>>10856797
>These people tend to have LOW IQs, and need help in their daily life.
No. See>>10856614
>>10856669>>10856748

>>10856773

[Anonymous No.10856808]

>>10856773
I see, now it hits me. My own logic even already states that a 3 need not map to an A, only that an A maps to a 3. A 3 is either an A and therefore holds, or something else an irrelevant.

Interesting. /sci/ has expanded my logic today. I'm working on a lossless compression algorithm and may try to use this.

[Anonymous No.10856813]

>>10856808
>my logic

[Anonymous No.10856815]

>>10856804
Read the Source poorfag, I know your lab boss has been stealing all your research and calling it "WORK", kinda like how government steal from the public and call it taxes.
Perhaps oneday when you realize your degree was simply a certificate given to you by the government with the hidden label of "Government LapDog" for the real geniuses you&ll pick up the book I quoted and realize how short sighted and naive you were

[Anonymous No.10856819]

>>10856813
The logic I stated in my post, a high level derivative of the underlying logic that drives the universe.

Happy now? Prick.

[Anonymous No.10856832]

>>10856808
>I'm working on a lossless compression algorithm
>and may try to use this

>>10856819
>a high level derivative
>of the underlying logic
>that drives the universe

[Anonymous No.10856837]

>>10856832
>Believes a machine can have logic beyond that of its constituent parts
>Believes the universe can support the existence of a machine with logic beyond its own

[Anonymous No.10856844]

>>10856614
The distinction between "if" and "if and only if" is often ignored in spoken/nontechnical language. This is a likely source of confusion.

[Anonymous No.10856846]

>>10856837
>>Believes a machine can have logic beyond that of its constituent parts
>>Believes the universe can support the existence of a machine with logic beyond its own

[Anonymous No.10856847]

>>10856844
true dat
same with the necessary AND sufficient conditions distinctions

[Anonymous No.10856850]

>>10856846
>>

[Anonymous No.10856854]

>>10856850
babby's first recursion

[Anonymous No.10856855]

>>10854415
Stay sober.

[Anonymous No.10856858]

>>10856844
pretty much
the question has no real bearing other than how accurately you care to view language.
It's not about intelligence at all, but about pointing out inherent biases in language. This likely would explain why different demographics answer differently.

[Anonymous No.10856861]

>>10856815
I don't care in the slightest about your deluded thoughts.
>>10856844
It's if, not if and only if. You're just getting it wrong.

[Anonymous No.10856865]

>>10856773

Whites are more out-groupedly altruistic than any other group, therefore, if your posts are an attack on whites, it fails.

[Anonymous No.10856867]

>>10856861
>MY THOUGHTS
<HEAVILY RESEARCHED TEXT

My apologies, I thought you were retarded enough to actually have a lapdog certificate, but in fact you are only retarded enough to think about having one, your clear lack of reading ability is clear of that.

[Anonymous No.10856869]

>>10856844
>>10856858
No it isn't.
If you drink alcohol, you mst be over 21

Vodka juice 23 12

Same example, only that you know the answer from memory.

[Anonymous No.10856871]

>>10856869
oh shit

[Anonymous No.10856877]

>>10856869
>If you LEGALLY drink alcohol IN THE US, you must be over 21
>Vodka juice 23 12
And no, it's not from memory, but rather from the social context of the question. Framing matters.

[Anonymous No.10856880]

>>10856869
Mind slightly blown.

[Anonymous No.10856883]

>>10856877
>social context of the question
more like concrete familiarity than abstract

[Anonymous No.10856910]

>>10856748
A does not have to occur always with 3. It is if not if only if

[Anonymous No.10856926]

>>10856910
i can’t believe a board filled with cstards and mathfags can’t figure out what is being asked in the nigger’s stupid question.

[Anonymous No.10856951]

>>10856815

[Anonymous No.10856960]

>>10856951
Lol. Imagine coming across that in a scientific paper and tell me you wouldn't read it with a bit more interest.

[Anonymous No.10856975]

>>10854415
It's probably a coincidence you used the ape meme, but funnily enough apes have it.
The current hypothesis is we traded for something better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktkjUjcZid0

[Anonymous No.10856983]

>>10856975
>The current hypothesis is we traded for something better.
That doesn't seem sensible to me. You of course have mosaicism of the brain in primates, blood flow and some other structural requirements where I suppose we developed something else "at a cost". But my suspicion is what actually happened is man was dumbed down by the Gods in one of our prior iterations where they took our fine grained use of a 6th sense. It may also be that man doesn't descend from old world primates at all, but new world primates who coincidentally also have stop codon in the CMAH gene.

Naturally no one will ever want to discuss this with me and I've been so severely maladaptively dumbed down by dealing with retards that I probably couldn't immediately talk to legitimate human being anyway. The ol' catch 22.

Fuck you. Just for existing, I don't need to know who or how you are. Fuck you all.

[Anonymous No.10857028]

>>10856975
It seems it should be a serious defect especially for langauge.

[Anonymous No.10857035]

>>10856983
A reasonable potential cause might be that the size of our brains makes it way too hard to supply them with nutrients, which might also be the actual cause why so few animals ever develop big brains and those who do are usually massive themselves.

[Anonymous No.10857051]

>>10857035
Possibly. I think it's may be about the neocortex. Man, in his ability and "consciousness", is in fact robbed and forever barred from access to the deep subconscious state experienced by the other animals. It's about the layout and composition of one's conscious frame.

My mother has a photographic memory. She's also Rh negative and smokes a lot of ganja. I used to have a near photographic memory and remember everything I saw and heard in near perfect detail. This changed when I transitioned from a passive observer state living outside of myself, and started to live within some sort of a "me". It's hard to put into words. Short version is, it interrupts the fluid indexing and association of long term memory, and perhaps even the storage of that information. I'm willing to bet you'd see changes in rhythmic slow activity as well.

Recollection however I've found is less about what's there, and more about the state you're trying to recall in. I don't know. It's been a shitty, fucked up life of loss and torture. I existed. Never mind, overall.

[Anonymous No.10857062]

>>10856951
The first is correct
Thr second is correct in certain contexts
The third is a joke.

[Anonymous No.10858556]

>>10857028
How is that so?
We use language pretty well, while primates are not able to do so.

[Anonymous No.10858626]

>>10858556
I mean it seems like something that should make processing language near impossible; imagine you only get four words from each sentence and the rest is lost before you could process it. How could that help with language?

[Anonymous No.10858698]

>>10856748
You flip A to see if there is a 3 on the back. If not, you know the rule doesn't apply.
If yes, you still need to check if there is an A on the back of the 7, as that would contradict the rule as well. You want to find contradictions, with turning the 3 you could at best confirm the rule again, but never contradict it.

[Anonymous No.10859112]

>>10857062
That is correct. I'm inclined to believe, that second was supposed to be humorous as well.

[Anonymous No.10859687]

>>10859112
One step more and we finally get there.