Search for new games to share.
Syntax for writing comments.
Frequently asked questions.
Community rules and guidelines.
the universe expands into nothing.. but nothing can't exist, in any reality or space; virtual space, hyperspace, dimensional and interdimensional space, infinite universe, etc... but also including our mind.. which is a void, but a space nonetheless. So if you think of nothing.. that nothing exist into your.. mind void space, therefor, that nothing, was actually something. In conclusion, nothing is impossible.. except nothing, because nothing is impossible.
I'm just a guy with a computer, let me know if im wrong, or what your opinion on this matter..
Comment has been collapsed.
Sometimes I think about the reason of our existence... but then I come back to point 0 because there are so many things that don't have an answer or are too hard to understand
well, I can argue that our existence is purely accidental. Its a bunch of chemical reaction that last for billion of years or more that created a bunch of shit, one of those shit is a type of shit that evolve into another shit, and eventually evolved into us... but that's going off topic. I wanna talk about nothing.
I know that I know nothing
I like to think that we exist just like any other animal on this planet - for the pure function of reproduction. That is the one true goal for any living thing - to create offsprings for species not to die off.
Yes, we have become intelligent and created totally different point of view and understanding of life. And I like that we set out our own dreams and ambitions (and try to figure out meaning of life) but essentially we are here only to reproduce. I mean think about it as something grander - we spend years finding mate, getting pregnant, raising children, teaching them our point of view, survival in this world and eventually how to find their own mate and have children.
Yes, there are people who deliberately choose not to have kids. Those who can't due to their sexual orientation. But that is a small part of species that is human. The general flow is just like any other living being.
Even if we consider to colonize space and travel to another galaxies, invent whatever mind can fathom. But where does all that lead if we don't create offsprings ? So I don't think we can call these "reasons of existence". And those reasons definitely are not concepts we have made up - feeling good, having experiences, being rich. Those are just things that humans have made to make them feel good and mean nothing out of the context.
If nothing is impossible, then No Thing is impossible. Call me Ms. No Thing. edit: I haven't slept in nearly 24 hours so 💜
Dude, it's puff puff PASS. Quit holding that shit.
That's something different though.
True, then again - nbdy expected the Spanish Inquisition ..
ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι εἰδέναι.
... I seem, then, in just this little thing to be wiser than this man at any rate, that what I do not know I do not think I know either.
ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι εἰδέναι.
... I seem, then, in just this little thing to be wiser than this man at any rate, that what I do not know I do not think I know either.
Nothing IS a paradox. Everything must come from nothing yet nothing cannot exist. For example what created the universe...it could not have come from nothing, what was before the big bang..nothing?..it came from something an infinitely dense something that exploded into everything.
Multiple universes require a beginning, blackholes that condense into infinitely dense matter that then bursts through into the birth of a new universe...mini re-births. IF....IF god existed what created God..nothing?? If you have a created you have a creator, if you have a beginning you have an end. UNLESS, everything is cyclical, like a snake eating it's own tail, as no matter can be destroyed only transformed, transmuted. Maybe Consciousness is the true fabric to all creation and the universes are simply constructs within that consciousness . Worst part is that you can never truly know because you are confined by your four dimensional senses and there are MANY MANY more dimensions of reality. Not to mention that there is a very seriously held scientific theory that it is more likely that we exist in a simulation than the one true reality anyway. Odds are seriously against us and ultimately you could never know if you are in the real world or a virtual one or even virtual neurons in a virtual brain having a virtual experience...anyway is anyone else gonna smoke this thing cuz i can't feel my face anymore, goddamn that's some good s**t!
Have you been listening to a lot of Alan Watts lately? I can easily tell
I listen to and read the books from all of the great minds of our crazy civilization friend, scientists, philosophers, radical thinkers, poets and rebels, but I defiantly recommend Alan Watts and Terence McKenna for the psychedelic pioneers amongst us! :)
I love Watts so much. What an amazing mind. By the way, this game has a lot of naration from him
dont know who that is.. but im gonna check him out.. but i feel like by the end of this, I'll have more questions than answers.
ofc you will, that is the purpose of questions after all : )
I'm mildly confused about the part where you say that nothing can't exist.
It can exist in the same way that you can count to zero.
I have here a number of apples. The number of apples I have is zero. I can count them. Zero. Done. Zero apples. Not zero oranges, not nothing at all, but specifically zero apples.
Nothing at all is when you try to count literally everything. And there are zero of them. You expect to find things, and they are all not there.
If you're checking stock on the shelves of a store, and you expect to find at least one something, finding zero of anything may come as a poor surprise. Perhaps someone stole the last thing. But in any case, it's definitely not there. It could be somewhere else. Or it could be gone forever. In any case, there is nothing there on that shelf, and it exists as zero of that thing you expected to find.
Nothing can, and does, exist. (...unless it doesn't, which I'm willing to concede in certain arguments)
Now let's talk about infinity! (a concept, not a number)
im talking about true nothingness. if you have zero apples, then therefor, you have zero apples.. that is something, not nothing.
I addressed that.
How about if it was put another way...nothing is NOTHING..If there was ever nothing then nothing could have ever come from that nothing so therefore there must of always been something because nothing can come from nothing only simple processes becoming more complicated processes that give rise to ever more complex systems. The big bang wasn't nothing. In science it is a extremely dense point of all energy that destabilised and exploded into all the matter in our universe. That dense point of origin existed in a point in "beyond' space and time but it was still a 'something' not a nothing. Nothing is the complete absence of something...how could everything/anything come from ABSOLUTE NOTHING?
You're making the assumption that it's impossible for something to come from absolute nothing. You may be right. But you can't prove it.
Again my point still stands..paradox
The concept of 'the point of origin' for all matter, space and energy is something beyond us right now, though whether or not that origin has any correlation to conceptual 'nothingness' remains to be established. The abstract of 'true nothingness' as you seem to mean it, is something of a construct that we invented as a placeholder for our lack of understanding. Kind of like how 'time' does not exist beyond being a constructed metric by which we chart event progression.
All this said, I'm gonna segue into some TL;DR now all due to that run-on line you wrote. Mostly because it's the kind of thing I hear repeated by people, but when they aren't more specific. Consider everything after this sentence to be less directed at you personally, and more like a hypothetical for another reader who is bulldozing into complex stuff with their admirable curiosity, and is probably gonna run long and sound preachy and full of itself but eh, I don't expect you to reply to it at all given its not really directed at you.
Why do you assume that it is impossible for anything to originate from nothing? Be careful to pecify the context of your 'nothing', because if the 'nothing' is simply a limited physical absense, then 'nothing' does not need to be an origin when it can be a vessel to something else. A patch of dirt that contains no life may not reasonably spontaneously generate life, however should a seed fall upon it by chance, then that 'nothing' becomes 'something' as it facilitates by allowing something to occupy it.
If you instead meant the context of your 'nothing' to be the abstract concept of nothingness itself, then you have already presupposed all possible contemplance of that 'nothing' by restricting it entirely to just being a concept, and not a thing. It cannot be anything other than 'nothing' simply because it has no dimensions, no substance, no anything beyond the thought that percieves the notion of it. Expecting such an abstract nothingness to ever be 'something', would be like first defining that water is wet, and then wondering why water is never dry. However if that conceptual nothingness is percieved to have a location of any kind, no matter how vague ("There is nothing there" or "There is an absense of anything here"), then it is no longer just an abstract, because it is by its very core nature a state with a parallel. If it has an alternate state, then it is concievable that under the correct circumstances, no matter how remote, that state may be changed. The very occurrance of life itself is an example of that. No matter the vastness of all of physical existence, no matter how random and specific the material proximities of our conception, and the infinitesimal chances of the required events and chemical interaction that caused our most distant primal ancestors to form, it still happened. Eventually. It was the binary "1" that came from the binary "0" by sheer overwhelming scope of random happenstance of forces and material both gigantic and miniscule. If the definition of your 'nothing' is not entirely and purely a mental construct, then it can at least become a something simply by being extant beyond the confines of a mind, or perhaps even generate something via elements within its bounds that we simply lack the means or knowledge to comprehend.
Sorry for the tangent, heh. Though now that we understand the importance of whether what we speak of is the mental abstract or nothingness or a severe physical absense, we have to be careful not to switch between the two accidentally during discussion or else we begin to confuse the tangible with the conceptual. Physicality is an important thing that drastically alters the conversation.
"If there was ever nothing then nothing could have ever come from that nothing so therefore there must of always been something because nothing can come from nothing"
Yow, that's one hell of a run-on sentence.
I mean, not to criticise your writing, because looking at my own mess of words above this sentence there's no way in hell I'd look down on you while I'm spitting tangled word spaghetti myself, but we need to be careful of phrasing. Rushing through things that have a lot of implied detail can certainly make them seem to be consistent in the moment, but if you try to build a model that stands only because it isn't properly scrutinised, then anything you build on top of that will be wobbly at best! Try to reiterate this but slower, more sequentially, and try to articulate the steps clearer to make sure the two 'types' aren't being mixed together. By unfolding it into longer-form explanation its easier to see if there are any holes or hiccups in the chain of thought.
While you may understand your own train of thought, try to remember you're trying to convey a complex idea to others not privy to your headspace, so it has to track closely beyond the written communication gap. And uh, yeah, I know that's a super difficult task. I've been trying to find the proper words to condense one of my most (personally) profound feeling / thoughts since I was a kid, but never quite managed to do so without the words completely whiffing what I'm trying to uh... solidify? Goddamnit now is not the time for my wordage to crap out. Ugh.
(Sweet jesus this got long. Caffeine, a week of wonky sleep, then sleep procrastinating and getting into a fun subject? That escalated quickly. Here's hoping someone slides in here and deposits some counterpoint that'll blow my mind, that's always a fun wake-up.)
Ah, there you are, finally. Thought you'd never join the conversation. Nice name by the way..how apt for the subject material.
Really enjoyed reading your thoughts and opinions. Your the kind of person I'd love to spend an evening bouncing around ideas with. You're a rare breed indeed Sir..or Madame. Didn't take it personally, although your critique could be misconstrued as condescending in parts I totally understand what you are getting at. I particularly liked the "now slow down, think about what you want to say and use your big boy words" bit, wow! :P
I did actually write that "run-on sentence" the way that I did on purpose. My twisted sense of humor, apologies. It seemed absurd to me to that a limited human intellect could ever TRUELY comprehend how something could just pop into existence from absolute nothingness or the alternative of a cyclical eternal system that could exist forever with no beginning and no end. Your Uroboros.
(That's the snake/dragon eating it's own tail for those that don't know. I actually mentioned it myself in an earlier post.)
There is actually another possibility in regards to nothingness that no one has mentioned yet and that is that we could all just pop out of existence along with everything else at any moment. Equally absurd but still, a possibility!
What I mean by absolute nothingness is an absence of anything, no mass, zero energy, zero ways of creating energy, EVER. A non-starter. Permanent non existence. Therefore no way to become anything EVER. The intuitive conclusion surely is that..nothing (no thing) should exist. The easy, uncomplicated story we don't have to debate...end of problem because we no longer exist.. Only there is a big problem because we do exist. Because we exist we now have to face all the counter intuitive, spooky quantum mechanics, the impossible yet somehow possible position we all find ourselves in, existence.
At this point you could simply throw in the argument "well we do exist, regardless of the fact we shouldn't so It doesn't matter" fair point but unsatisfying. This is the reason the whole thing is absurd to me. How can a brain that can barely comprehend the universe it inhabits ever hope to comprehend that which physically lies beyond it. I'm just pointing out the madness of trying to rationalize the irrational or know the unknowable and yet our human brains must try to make sense of it anyway. As is it's very nature.
As for the always something model, where does the system start/stop/loop? I guess you'd have to make a series of assumptions. Was the big bang the start? Are there clusters of universes? Just like there are clusters of galaxies, like billions of stars that revolve around a super massive blackhole at the center of a galaxy, planets revolving around suns. We see the same behavior in the sub atomic world and as you know the universe is very much fractal in it's nature. We could make the assumption then that the macro expands out further beyond our own universe. Is there an "ultraverse" that contains universal clusters? Is it more akin to a star nursery, only for universes? Some have suggested a membrane. Does this system of systems within systems go on forever? What is the origin point? Does the whole thing somehow fold in on itself, an infinity loop like the uroboros. As in no system is the ultimate "final system" or "master system" you travel far enough out and you loop right back around into the infinitesimally small. Just like a fractal Pattern every part is also the whole.
To clarify, when I talk about existence I'm talking about outside of our universe as well as within. Science simply fails at this point and will forever be denied it's "final theory" (not talking about TOE) regardless of whether you subscribe to "pop, oh look everything from nothing" or the "well it was always there and will continue to be forever" because the answer to how could this be in either of those scenarios is "urrm, i guess, magic!" You can never scientifically, logically explain how something came from absolute nothingness or how something has always existed in a eternal system with no end and no beginning. Unless we can be satisfied with the answer "it just does".
We shouldn't exist yet we do, The impossible is possible because here we are, we are both the wave AND the particle, the zero and the one, a walking contradiction, a paradox, etc..but I literally know nothing, and don't claim to. I'm just thinking out loud and wondering what other people think about this subject matter.
Like you i work long hours and get little rest so it's a miracle I can even begin to try and form a coherent sentence. I'm sure you'll pick apart everything I've written but at least I'm attempting to think outside of the box and understand incredibly complex ideas with limited knowledge and understanding...i will continue to study. Take care and I look forward to being schooled again soon. :)
P.S. - I hope you like tangled word spaghetti because that's the only meal I can cook, oopsies!
Haha, yeaaaah. It's tricky to write out my thoughts because without my verbal tone to help temper it, I can totally see how it can come across as patronising or worse. I think a lot of those aspects come from having dealt with a certain thing that pushes my buttons a bit too much. I love thinking on these kinds of things, but I had this run of bad luck where I'd keep meeting people who would insist their thinking was bulletproof, but whenever I'd try to get them to explain it, they'd absolutely refuse to talk about it properly, and would only do the 'speedrun' version so that it couldn't be given a real shakedown. Like : "Hey if you think about it good can't exist without evil therefore evil is actually good because without it good couldn't exist so there would only be evil so its good to be evil". And any attempt to say "Slow down a sec, that doesn't hold up" would be met with "You just don't GET it, you think you know everything!" and a subsequent "SEE!?" if I tried to explain myself. It feels kinda like those badly designed brainteasers where the questions are horribly worded and then it acts like you're an idiot for not magically making leaps of logic not even touched upon in the context (especially where other less nebulous leaps of logic were possible, but you didn't use them because you were playing by the apparent established rules). I dunno. Maybe I just get grumpy when something seems cool but it gets tripped up by things that seem a bit silly to me. Maybe I'm just judgemental, idk.
So yeah, run-on steamroller-sounding sentences can convert my face all putty-like into a genuine >:U, with me assuming the worst.
My bad. ;P
Though funnily enough I picked up on the online handle of Uroboros only partially due to thinking about weird subjects, it had more significance because of how I type / babble. It never ends. TL;DR is a way of life once your WPM gets to a certain point! Thankfully it makes me appreciate word spaghetti, so your post was totally fine, haha.
But yeah I think in this case the concept of an absolute nothingness is only conceptual, because unless I'm mistaken there is no such purity of absense in physical reality (thankfully!), or we simply haven't encountered or been able to detect it with our level of understanding and technology. Absolute vacuum, or areas of absolute void, are at least extant enough that they have a physical boundary or location, so while they may be nothing, that nothingness is a temporary state that can change under the right conditions (the most likely feels like it would just be proximity to something that isn't a 'nothing').
I guess maybe this just means I'm a bit of a spoilsport, but I consider the concept of 'absolute nothingness' to be so abstract that there isn't much to really think on when we define it in such an absolute and self-encapsuled way. Its kind of like when people define a god as omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, undetectable and non-communicating, at that point its very definition makes it so beyond our ability to measure or interact with, that it may as well be defined as 'unknowable' and considered a non-factor in our lives as it feels pointless to try even guess or conceptualise at, perhaps at least until our technology advances and then we can check again whether it is still undetectable and/or hasn't actually communicated (outside of just imagination). But when you nudge part of that definition, such as to confirm god as anthropomorphic, or flawed in some way, or assigned an actual pattern in will or behaviour, we are given a vague handle to begin playing the game of what-ifs with, y'know?
So I guess in this case, it's just me saying "Eh, I can't do anything with this subject", perhaps coupled with "This sucks, the rules of the game just says 'you can't play' ". Lets just go with me being a spoilsport with a stick up his ass ;P
Thank you so much for getting back to me. I genuinely enjoy having conversations with people such as yourself. I'd much rather surround myself with people who are much smarter than I am than be the "one eyed king in a village of the blind". I meet so few people who can even hold a conversation about anything beyond the mundane. Parroting the same old political nonsense or babbling on about the latest reality TV show or meme or viral sensation. 99% of the people I interact with on a daily basis never take the time to stop looking down at their phone's and look up into the universe and contemplate what lies within and beyond.
I don't believe you are a spoilsport or you have a stick up your ass. I believe you are an intelligent person, with well thought out ideas that finds frustration with people who lack the ability to articulate their view point or realize the obvious (to you at least) flaws in their argument. I personally enjoy being shown the error in an assumption, or being forced to look at something from a different point of view. To be asked to expand on an idea or reconsider a standpoint. How else can you grow, learn, adapt and reevaluate and evolve ideas and opinions. Humility and a willingness to listen to and TRULY try and understand another point of view is something that is sorely lacking in the world and much needed I might add. It truly saddens me how, childish, ignorant and tribalistic we remain as a global civilization. It's a true tragedy that the best and brightest of us don't actually represent us as a species. Instead we're stuck with mouth breathing sycophants and psychopaths who can't see past their own small minded, selfish agender for wealth, power and control. Embarrassing is an understatement!
Believe it or not I actually share the same sentiment as you with regards to the "can't do anything with this" part. We could agree at least that our universe was not a case of something from nothing. Maybe? For the lay person might incorrectly assume (and often does) that the story of the big bang was one of "there was nothing and then boom, UNIVERSE" This isn't the case. As you know there was a something before the big bang, an extremely hot and extremely dense point. Ironically due to an imperfection in it's self-containment, so to speak, it destabilized and BOOM, big bang! (do I have this wrong?) Focusing then on, WHAT IS that extremely dense, extremely hot point you could imagine a "space" beyond that something akin to a uber-blackhole(?) residing in an ultraverse(?) that condensed everything around it into an extremely dense and hot point until it finally destabilized and gave birth to our universe. In that model you could expand the idea out ad infinitum, the universes within universes theory. A model of perpetual fractal patterning that reaches out into infinity. Or do you stop at the point of our local universe (everything within and not beyond it) and say this is the point where that dense and hot point just popped into existence, proceeded to destabilize and "birthed" itself. Or do you say that point was always there, spent a long long while being stable, eventually destabilized and here we all are.
I get what you are saying, we lack the tools at this point of speculation to know what, if anything is beyond our universe, how the point of origin came to be and the "can't do anything with this" bit kicks in, all bets are off.
Would a big TOE give us the answer to this question? Or would be still be left with a "now what" situation? Stands to reason that a theory of everything is still only a theory of everything in our particular universe and the laws that govern it don't necessarily govern other universes and what lies beyond and between them. Unless it does and in order to have a universe that is able to persist and evolve for any given length of time these specific laws always have to occur. Finally seeing as the big bang occurred due an imperfection in the first place maybe that is the reason our universe will "die" the heat death we currently believe it will. Perhaps it has all been less of a big bang and more of a big death due to a fatal hemorrhage...Jesus that's bleak! A perfect universe remains as a perfectly contained point of extreme density and heat forever, that's a little more elegant...no?
Happy Heat Death Everybody! I'm out. :P
Simply put "why do we exist?" because we DO! Mind wreaker!
+infinity -infinity, both are singularities that loop back into each other... nothing is everything and everything is nothing thus everything ends up being something
The real question is space the absence of matter? Is there such a thing as empty space? I don’t think space is nothing or that there is any amount of space -infinity or +infinity that is empty.
Hey Captain Terror, you know that whole entire period of time where you didn't exist, before you were born? The rest of time that will continue after we're all gone? I guess you could describe that as nothing. No observer, no objective reality...nothing! Pretty bleak but true.
Something only exists because we are alive to perceive that exists? Interesting concept!
Or it exists without our interaction but remains as a probability wave until it is localized my a process of consciousness interacting with it.
If a tree falls in the forest...
Always enjoyed the layers to answering that question, once I let the logical bits of brain get past the obvious "of course it makes a sound!" answer.
I get your point but it is a bit misleading to compare soundwaves to the collapse of a wave function into a particle through the direct interaction by the observer in regards to the double slit experiment in quantum physics. I'd like to see you easily explain how you could prove the entire universe did not/does not remain a wave function until it is collapsed by a conscious observer seeing as that event has forever been passed and is unvisitable. The point of the tree in this context is that it's wave has already collapsed as it exists as a particle (many) i.e the tree and therefore whatever happens to the tree after that point is irrelevant..."of course it makes a sound!" is always the answer...did anything hear it is another question entirely. :)
I'm liking your responses, for what it's worth. And I'm not up to par to replying to them all. But even so, I'm certainly not going to attempt to explain things about the pre-observable universe!
However, an example where the tree may not have made a sound (there are many many answers to the original contemplation) is actually quite appropriate to the site: video games. It may be important to render the realistic fall of a distant tree, in case it hits the player's house or something (an unlikely scenario, since it'll probably just be deferred until the player approaches the culling distance, but anyway...), as it's outside of the distance the player can hear things, the falling tree makes no sound. If any of those "we're living in a video game" theories ever actually pan out (doubtful), this could be an actual optimization. I don't personally believe that's likely, but it's still interesting to me to consider weird scenarios such as these.
Thanks, back at you, I'm just throwing out into the ether as many interesting ideas as I can in the hope people will discuss them, argue points and think about things that are worth contemplating. I wish more people actually made an effort to look into philosophy, science and alternate theories. Not a fan of the told how to think, hand-holding society we all are living in. Advancement was never made by the institutionalized, dogmatic drones of the world but the free-thinking, out-of-the-box, risk taking rebels and outcasts of our "civilization"
Keep on thinking...
oh great, now we're heading towards Schrödinger's cat logic.
@jeffhowe That was my point further up in the tread. There is always a system that supports the system. Like software dictating the laws of function. The quantum world is the software than governs the classical universe but where is the hardware located if the universe is the operating system?
It's a matter of perspective: how do you define nothing?
So, the answer to your question is a question of your question. Philosophy is a fascinating thing.
About your 2nd point:
If such pockets are common they could hide entire regions of space from us that we will never know about. Just like the human body consists mostly of "nothing", yet is dense enough to block most "things" from passing through without touching "something".
Scale is an amazing thing, isn't it? It's simple to think of our house or our neighborhood, but when we change the scale to every single square inch/millimeter, it becomes almost like its own city. Change that to an even smaller scale, and it becomes its own galaxy. One could scan and measure the human body and find no empty space, but zoom in further and find quite a lot of it. Spaces between molecules, atoms, even subatomic particles.
Also interesting is that we measure the nothing as the anomaly, but what if we reverse the perspective; make special note of the something. An object flying through space has its own path that would not be altered if not for that weird anomaly of the human body in your example, altering its natural path.
I love how articulate this is. Its like a kind of forbidden, unobtainable artistry to me, for I know only the way of the TL;DR.
I would have whitelisted you had you not already been tagged as such. Cuts straight through the mental static and gets to the core.
Thank you! That's another philosophy of mine: framing a concept in a long, complicated way with a lot of complex words is good for making yourself sound smart, which is beneficial to yourself; cutting through all of that to make it accessible to others is sharing wisdom, which is beneficial to everyone, including yourself. Even when it's complete nonsense, philosophy is a wonderful way to get your brain going, and achieve who knows what revelations. We should all think for ourselves, but with an underdeveloped mind, that comes with its own set of problems.
I appreciate your appreciation of this subject, and since it's dangerous to think alone, take this! 💙
In my case I just feel compelled to explain every part of my reasoning. When I don't elaborate at length, it feels like I am cheating my way through discourse by not laying my process bare for others to spot inconsistencies or errors. A kind of assumption that what I'm articulating is correct enough that it can be a tidy easily read package, and not a sprawling mess of "show your workings".
Well, that, and I've been trained by a lifetime of people deliberately misinterpretting me to preempt them and cover everything on a first pass. It's kind of sad, but due to how people can work, I've come to realise that sometimes you need more than just being correct to convince someone, and if certain common points aren't somewhat synchronised between participants then its... kinda like having two people sat at the same board but playing two entirely different games. That desync is beyond frustrating for me, so I try to do all the work up front, rather than letting the communication / thinking gap get bridged from both sides (due to expecting most people aren't interested in bridging the gap, only launching their half across the divide).
Its strange how a lack of trust or patience can self-sabotage due to expecting the worst, heh.
Still, my babbling aside, getting to see such well-articulated posts is refreshing to say the least!
It seems you and I have that in common, though mine was born not through intentional misrepresentation, but just being weird. I'd say something that didn't seem out of place to me, and all I'd get in return was a puzzled stare. Since my own mind works a lot better when I have all of the pieces, I decided that providing them would work just as well, and to those willing to hear, it did. I have to specify that, because there are those who, regardless of the evidence presented, refuse to let go of their perception of the truth. A good example is when I was asked for "one good reason that Pluto shouldn't be considered a planet." I provided 3, and the response was that condescending look that the ignorant like to give in the face of anything that challenges their beliefs, so that you look like the idiot. But I agree: it's your best shot at preempting that sort of reaction; you'll get through to the receptive. For those that you can reach, that kind of preparation born of expecting the worst is worthwhile, I think.
It also helps you find potential fallacies in your own knowledge and helps keep you on the right track; I train a lot of our new hires at work, and one thing I tell them when they feel like they're lacking confidence is, "Confidence is dangerous. How many times have you been 100% sure of something that blew up in your face?" We've all had that, and no amount of preparation will ever completely eliminate that from one's life, but the more you question yourself, the more likely you are to stay on the right path. Self-doubt is actually a wonderful thing to have, so long as you don't let it prevent you from living your life. The path to true wisdom is understanding that we understand nothing.
One more observation then I'm out.
If over a process of billions of years the universe through biological evolution gave birth to a multitude of organisms that resulted ultimately in consciousness then you could argue that the universe itself is conscious, being that we are a part of the system that can now study itself from within, understand those processes' through the scientific method and find new ways to manipulate the system in ways beyond the original code. We have become the system within the system and our consciousness is ultimately the fragmented consciousness of the universe. Maybe we should stop seeing ourselves as separate from the system and instead an integral part of it's evolution. Peace.
i wish i was half as smart as you.
thanks for your input friend.
I imagine you are just as smart as me I've just had more time to think about it.
Thanks for creating a thread that actually prompted critical thinking and not just mindless inane garbage.
The fact that we exist at all is in itself a miracle and i'm sure the true nature of reality is far more incredible than even the smartest minds on this planet are able to comprehend. We won't be able to pass the limitations of our flawed inferior brains until we Integrate with AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) That's when your wildest sci-fi dreams, and potential dystopian nightmares will become realized.
Until the singularity, stay safe and look after you and yours...
Unless of course we are not a miracle and just one of a near infinite number of conscious beings out there that all think they are a miracle.
Does the Daddy Long Legs in my toilet think he is a miracle just because there are too many obstacles between him and the Daddy Long Legs in my Kitchen to find out he isn't?
Are there beings out there that have broken through this barrier? If 2 civilizations possess both the technological and biological means to register each other, and time and distance allow them to exist in the same instance to create this awareness...
I didn't mean human beings specifically are a miracle, that's why i used the word exist not alive. I meant the fact that ANYTHING exist anywhere in any form or in any dimension is a miracle (not in the biblical sense either I'd like to stress) The OP was about something and nothing. Whether or not something has always existed or everything came from nothing is equally insane and paradoxical. I'm 100% sure (ok, 99.9%) that other life in other forms and in other dimensions exist within and maybe even outside of our universe. Just take a good dose of DMT if you want proof of concept :P You'd have to be a fool to think in the last 13 billion years life on any one of the trillions of planets in any one of the billions of galaxies that host those planets hasn't harbored life, reached technological heights, probably far beyond our own. You could speculate on these things forever. It stands to reason you might even get to a point where you are able to make your own big bangs, escape into other universes, create entire virtual universes one of which we might be in right now. Distance is the biggest issue two advanced civilizations face of ever meeting each other...let's hope the classical view of "nothing can travel faster than the speed of light" is incorrect and technologies of the future can manipulate dimensions and spacetime to overcome such vast distances. Time is the other problem, how many advance civilizations have risen and fell with millions of years of time between them both. There could be one right now monitoring our progress and wondering when those stupid monkey's are going to put aside tribalism, grow up and use technology for the benefit of it's civilization and not for control, profit and destruction....the general consensus in science is that it is more likely that life is abundant in almost infinite variety throughout the universe and I'd have to agree with it..I certainly do not think we are a unique "accident" confined to one specific planet in the entire universe. Even if there is only one planet with life on it orbiting around a star out of the billons of stars in that galaxy there are 100's of billions of galaxies so that would still be 100's of billons of worlds harboring unique forms of life!!
But if life is abundant in our universe, why would the existence of anything anywhere be a miracle? It could just as well mean there are lots of anythings anywhere... Or do you theorize that there is only one anything anywhere? A singular infinity as opposed to an infinite infinities?
As for DMT, no thanks. I personally see those experiences of proof that humans make shit up when they don't understand something. Until we discover we possess sensory organs that can register or pick up things we were unaware of I'll mark those near-death, afterlife and other-dimension experiences as our brains coming up with a coping mechanism to make sense of the nonsensical. It is what humans do, we make things up to bring order to chaos (or to gain power over others)
The miraculous part was in reference to the fact that all of existence, all things known and unknown either come from something that has always been or from nothing into something...either idea is incredible. Again, not from a religious standpoint but from one of science. The life part is not my focus in that statement but the entire system, both the understood and yet to be discovered. Perhaps you would prefer I used the term incredible instead of miraculous?
The fact that EVERYTHING that exists exists at all IS incredible.
In regards to the DMT - which was meant as a joke by the way. It seems a shame to dismiss something that you have no personal experience with as merely a fantasy of the mind trying to cope with what it doesn't understand, Not only are psychoactive substances currently the focus of some serious and really promising SCIENTIFIC studies in regards to PTSD and people with terminal illness' but people who have taken those substances regularly say that the experiences they have are some of the most profound experiences of their lives...and that includes getting married and the birth of their children. In the experiments using DMT one of the most common reported experiences was interactions with strange, otherworldly entities that appeared to have knowledge beyond that of the subject. Scientist have already proven that DMT is released in the brains of dying rats, that DMT can be found in the cerebrospinal fluid, a protective covering for the brain in humans and it is currently believed it may also be produced in humans brains as they are dying. It is no wonder that you hear similar stories with OBE's as you do with DMT trips if this is the case. Seeing as taking DMT carries less risk than popping a paracetamol, causes no damage to the brain and is quickly broken down by the body why not actually have the experience for yourself and maybe completely change the parameters of what you think may be possible if only in your own mind and understanding further the true capabilities of your own consciousness. You literally have nothing to loose but a whole bunch of preconceived ideas.
At the end of the day even if it is all just in your head I could argue that our entire reality is just electrical impulses decoded by our brains (poorly at best seeing as we decode such a narrow band) and for all you know these substances allow for a broadening of that band. I don't disagree that we may lack the tools to fully decode what is being experienced but it doesn't mean the information being received isn't real. There are things happening around us all the time that we simply cannot perceive due to the nature of our brains not to mention the multitude of dimensions that we are locked off from perceiving...we don't even see the full spectrum of light.
At the end of the day if I didn't even own a drivers license I certainly wouldn't tell you how to drive a car. You can't draw a scientific conclusion if your not even willing to run the experiment. To claim you already know the outcome and the experiment is pointless is even worse.
I get the arguments on both sides and I sit directly in the middle knowing I know nothing so I'm not arrogant enough to dismiss things out of hand based on no personal experience. The thing I love about science is just when we think we've got it all figured out we find out we didn't have a clue. It's literally the history of science and human enquiry into the unknown.
I'm not going near DMT because psychosis runs in the family, I'm not keen to get paranoid or think I'm in a coffin for several weeks.
Your drivers license analogy doesn't really work, I can explain in detail how to fly an airplane, yet I've never flown one myself. I can even tell you how the experience feels without having experienced it myself. When you delve a little deeper you'll discover the truth, but most people don't. (Good Will Hunting much? :P)
I know I shouldn't dismiss things out of hand, but to me personally some things sound like "The winning lottery numbers could be exactly the same 3 times in a row, and 10 times, and 100 times, and 1000 times"
I for myself have to draw a line somewhere, my mind can only be so open.
So until I educate myself more or these theories reach the mainstream I'll go with my "The mind fills in the gaps and brings order to the chaos because of our fear of the unknown"
Lol, yeah you are right, really should of proof read that before firing off, but you get where I was going with that though. One counter point, you may be able to explain in detail how to fly the plane but you certainly will never know how the experience feels regardless of how many people explain how it felt to them. You do have to experience it yourself. You can hear every account under the sun about what it feels like to be drunk but you'll never truly know what it feels like until you experience it for yourself. Imagining what an experience is and actually experiencing it are two entirely different things...I dare you to tell a woman that recently had a child that having listened to her explain how she felt during pregnancy and the pain of giving birth you now fully understand her experience without ever having to experience it yourself. :P
As for the psychosis, apologies, I have a mother who's battled with depression her whole life and mental health issues are serious business, I'm sorry that is something you have to experience whether it is yourself or a family member.
I'd like to edit your theory to "The mind fills in the gaps and brings order to the chaos because it lacks the necessary hardware to decode the information correctly"
Unfortunately shortsighted scientific dogmatism can also fill in the gaps because of fear of the unknown. Or completely dismiss something all together because doesn't fit into it's world view.
Take care friend.
Yeah, I meant I can learn how to explain to someone else what being drunk is like, without having ever been drunk myself. I won't actually know what I'm talking about, I'd just be parroting others, but would I get caught?
I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else that I am right, just airing my opinions :)
You seem very knowledgeable, which is great, while I'm just throwing random oneliners around :P
I have a very unadventurous view of how things are or should be, I don't believe in higher beings, the supernatural, most alternative healing/therapies, etc. Which doesn't mean I don't like hearing about them, I just have to control my eyerolling sometimes when in company :P
Haha, I don't blame you for wanting to roll your eyes I'm not talking about any of that new age garbage. For the love of God (pun intended) don't tar me with that brush man..i believe in science, the scientific method, pier review, etc. Claiming one should believe in some divine god/spirit that no one else can see or hear. Or claiming that if you stick this crystal on your forehead you'll suddenly gain magical powers. All of this nonsense cannot scientifically be proven you just have to suspend your disbelief and have "faith". That is totally different than scientifically studying psychoactive substances that clearly have a measurable and profound experience on the subject and I'm saying do not band the woo-woo with DMT and other psychoactive substances.
There is growing evidence that the use of psychoactive substances are linked to the early practice of religion and that the original "religious experience" may come from the use of such substances. I know this seems bad on the surface as religion is often seen as the mortal enemy of science but the fact that religion ultimately and ironically gave rise to science is something in itself so that's worth considering for a moment. Can't stress this enough by the way, I AM NOT RELIGIOIUS.
I get that most people that live in the world of science run a mile from anything that may run the risk of falling into the woo-woo camp, fair enough as it can ruin your reputation quite quickly and people will no longer take you seriously. I'm just pointing out the danger of generalizing EVERYTHING that seems a bit "out there" as woo-woo and possibly discounting something that could potentially add a piece to the puzzle that is far from solved right now. Consciousness is an inconvenient part of the puzzle and I'm quite sure most serious scientists would like to do away with it saying "consciousness is an illusion, there is no such thing as free will, it's all just chemical reactions in the brain making you think you are smart, unique and in control when the reality is you are just an on-rails, biological robot".
Me personally, I'm going to attempt to balance the rational with trying to keep an open mind. This method seemed to work pretty well for the great scientific minds (of which I am most certainly NOT) of the past that pushed the boundaries of scientific discovery forward. But no woo-woo I promise! :)
Sorry if it seemed like I was painting you with the woo-woo brush, I didn't mean it like that. I was just explaining how boring and matter-of-fact I am, not how woo-woo anyone else is :P
I was reading a politics thread on another forum and came across an interesting video series by Stanford professor Robert Sapolsky about how involuntary our free-will really is, and how society puts too much weight on nurture instead of nature (thinking in categories and boxes) :
I'm only on episode 2 so I might be getting a lot wrong, but it's interesting so far.
(I'm also watching The Alt-Right Playbook, darn humans are strange animals)
Thanks for the link, I'll be sure to check it out. :)
I've already taken some deep dives into the subject material with respect to both sides of the argument and there are some uncomfortable truths one has to face. It's definitely not for those with fragile ego's regarding free-will if it turns out to be correct. Some of the latest findings in neuroscience lead one to some uncomfortable conclusions once you fully realize the implications. I find the stuff about the power of the subconscious mind absolutely fascinating if not some what disturbing especially when you realize how easy it is to manipulate and influence it through subconscious suggestion. I can imagine some enlightened society of the future with a greater moral compass banning advertising as a violation to the individuals subconscious mind due to it's power and influence over it which is already very well documented and understood. Forces one to ask the question: How much of our perceived thoughts, ideas and options are truly our own? Especially when we have to navigate through a sea of constant subconscious manipulation living in the modern world. Is social conditioning really the enemy of processive thought and societal evolution? It's one of the reasons why I keep banging on about recognizing and not letting propaganda and preconceived ideas contaminate your world view whist still maintaining a rational and healthy skepticism towards ideas that challenge it. Easier said than done, right?! It's that damn ego of ours that always gets in the way. Strange animals indeed!
That's where some of my scepsis came from when you said "one of the most common reported experiences was interactions with strange, otherworldly entities that appeared to have knowledge beyond that of the subject."
The subconscious is so full of things we did not even know we picked up on, neurogenesis says those things are overwritten as the brain develops, but what if the memories are there but the pathing is lost or inactive? If DMT breaks down inhibitions and removes barriers, doesn't it also reactivate those pathways and/or establish a new route to the memories? So now suddenly we get hit with knowledge and imagery we thought was lost (or didn't think was lost, we never knew we saw/retained it to begin with)
Suddenly you see Thor from Stargate, or remember a random fact from grandpa's encyclopedia you read on a rainy afternoon in 1988, or experience something you saw in Episode 5 of Season 6 of The X-Files VHS boxset.
Our imagination is very limited because we have a limited bandwidth to get our inspiration from, until the limits fall away.
But what do we do? We try to explain it by looking outside ourselves (entities, dimensions), instead of inside.
Without any experience myself I am inclined to say a DMT experience is an unguided time travel tour into our own memories.
edit: I wouldn't be surprised if the classic seeing of a fair-skinned blue-eyed angel during a near-death-experience sporadically changes to a geometric shape with many eyes and wings due to the memes lately depicting them as described in the Bible instead of as in Renaissance art.
Sure, I completely get it. I also completely understand how you would rationalize it to yourself having not had the experience. It's a pity really because ironically people like yourself actually having the experience adds weight to it's legitimacy because you're not inclined to flights of fancy and understand how the mind rationalizes what it see's based on it's belief system.
I believe one of the issues is the meme of what the "trip" is in the first place. It is nothing like that...at all. For a start you're not walking around in a dream telling everyone you love them then climbing the nearest building to jump off it because you think you can fly.
Surely if you thought you could fly you'd just take off from the ground anyway! :D
That is total nonsense. propaganda. Your body actually closes down, stays in one place, goes into a state of suspended animation. You hear a long tone that increases in intensity until you literally feel like you burst out the top of your own head. A breath taking, overwhelming feeling of joy, wonder, oneness with everything at a sub-atomic level overcomes you. Complete ego death...no longer part of your body, no longer connected to that thing you identify as you, in another place removed from your standard model of reality. Color more vivid and beautiful than you have ever experienced in your life...etc. It is so far beyond your own imagination it's ridiculous...not "ah yeah I remember this crazy dream sequence from that movie 10 years ago" much more like "what the hell am I even looking at, this is so far removed from my experience of what is possible I can't completely get my head around it" . Imagine going to an alien planet for the first time and having absolutely no point of reference for what is it you are looking at. These are universally reported things done in double blind tests with control groups and there are a long list of intelligent people including neuroscientists who have had these experiences knowing full well the limits of the human mind and it's "edited" view of the world due to their own personnel world view filters. Completely skeptical yet curious. It is not a waking dream, we all know what a dream is and it feels nothing like any dream you've ever had. Even if it is nothing more than a deep dive into your own subconscious mind it has already proven to be effective in both cases of PTSD and terminal illness because it has the effect of making you no longer fear death. The fact that DMT is a naturally occurring chemical found in the human body, specifically the human brain should at least peak your interest.
Anyway there are plenty of other fascinating subjects out there worthy of exploring of which this is only one, each to their own I guess. I do completely agree with you on all off your observations, I do think however that DMT should be in it's own category.
As I stated before, just because you and I both receive a signal and you interpret it as Mr. Spock and I see it as some kind of Goddess only proves are brains are too limited to properly decipher what we are receiving not the legitimacy of the signal. I can't wait until we can increase the bandwidth of our brains by integrating with AGI through interfaces like Elon Musk's Neural link...we can only imagine what the revelations might be. We'll talk (think?) directly mind to mind after the singularity friend. :)
We tell the universe what it is.
I love this theory. Thanks for sharing the observation with us!
I agree. The fact that there is something makes "nothing" practically impossible. "Nothing" exists as an abstract idea that can never be actualized.
Re-reading the OP "the universe expands into nothing" this the entropic universe theory of the universe continuing to expand forever into the future until all the blackholes evaporate and all function even at a sub-atomic particle level ceases. Worth mentioning that this is just a theory that hasn't been ultimately proven as correct by science. Until we fully understand dark matter and dark energy I wouldn't hold this to be the only possible conclusion for the universe's fate.
Science is like a child learning to walk right now, so much more to learn and understand. Once we have the ability to manipulate matter at a sub atomic level and 3d print anything out of nothing..real game changer. I imagine creating a new sun or punching a hole in spacetime, etc will be the equivalent of a kids primary school science project a couple of thousand years in the future, lol.
The universe doesn't expand "into nothing" as there is no center where it's expanding from. It doesn't expand into some surroundings, universe is everything there is, finite or infinite. The expansion is increase of distances between all objects (that are far away enough).
Yeah, not sure the OP understood what the heat death of the universe actually entailed in that particular theory. The distance between all things continuing to grow until eventually all function ceases. In this case technically there is still something rather than nothing but as I pointed out it's still only a theory and without a complete understanding of the universe at this point the jury is still out. The whole theory relies on our current understanding of Dark Energy being correct. I do however like Roger Penrose's theory: the idea that the heat death of our universe would inevitably bring about the birth of new big bangs, quite elegant and poetic..
In which case reincarnation goes far beyond the simple stardust anecdotes and analogies.
My primitive brain and simple understanding also like the Roger Penrose theory best. :P
can´t resist now ; )
This is you!( *･Θ･)σ💻ooO(CaptainTerror🤖)
You come from nothing and you return to nothing. So what have you lost? Nothing!
Well now I'll have Life of Brian scenes stuck in my head for the rest of the day.
This reminds me of my time at Uni, when I had to make a presentation for our informatics course. We've got to decide on the topic freely, so we had to come up with something. I literally had no idea, like my brain went blank whenever I thought about that dumb representation, which was required of us only to see if we can put together a decent Powerpoint (I studied Earth Sciences so it felt like an irrelevant bother).
And then it came to me! I will do the presentation about NOTHING! Like the definition and interpretation of what we mean when we think about nothing. Is it absolute void, or just a relative term, expressing the lack of something we otherwise would expect to be there?
So I did it. We had to present it IRL in front of the teacher, standing in a line that progressed one by one. The girl who stood behind me was kinda nervous and we chatted quietly which seemed to easen her tension.
When I arived at the front and had to start my pres, I said something like: "This is a presentation about nothing. As in literally about NOTHING." And I've held a little pause to strenghten the surprise-factor.
At that moment, I've heard the girl facepalm behind me. HARD. xDD My short break practically emphasized the slap-sound to which I almost burst out laughing.
On a more serious note, I used to think a lot about such philosophycal topics. Its not easy and there are some serious rabbit-holes you could dive into. Ultimately this is a great way to come up with some abstract ideas and keep your mind busy.
Sagittarius A* quasar [possibly even a blazar] smiles upon us. Ask that particular celestial object what nothingness is - It'll demonstrates it without hesitation.