Hey b i have a theory about life and i do not know if it has an official name or not...

hey b i have a theory about life and i do not know if it has an official name or not, the theory is that nothing exists that is outside of our field of view, think of it, how do you know if your car exists if you none of your 5 senses can know that its there if your computer was turned off and you looked away from it without touching it how do you actually if it currently exists or not? if you have no way of actually knowing?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_permanence
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment
youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

That's actually how it works.

Everything is actually a jumble of probability waves that don't collapse on a fixed reality until they're observed. Your car is both in the driveway and has been stolen until you go observe it.

what im trying to say is how do you know if something exists if none of your 5 senses can "observe it"

im sure there's a wikipedia page on it

yeah i need to find it and who created it and what type of people think of it

*cough* schroedinger *cough*

you can infer its existence by observing its interactions with its surroundings.

for example:

>dat dark matter.
>dat dark energy.

here's another one: even if you were blind, you could still infer the existence of the sun by stepping into and out of shade.

you dont have to see, or touch, or smell, or hear the sun, to infer its existence.

are you 12 years old by any chance?

you fucking dumb fuck.

Beat me to it
>look up schroedinger's cat

this is called being retarded. your parents are infected with the zika virus.

you should consider the kys or the latter, senior an hero.

Nothing is proven real until perceived but we can assume through our perspective that things do happen outside of the microcosm of our lives, we could debate whether other people exist or not but that would defeat the point as we would enter an endless loop of if anything is real, just do what I do and go do what you want when you want, whether it is offensive or not because in the grand scheme we all die anyways

smfh...
ITT faggots pretend to matter with their finite thread that disappears soon and none of it matters because they go on to continue to be worthless faggots humping 4chin threads for the rest of their lives.

no matter what you do here...you will always be a worthless faggot.

stop pretending. move the fuck on.
go to Sup Forums with your thinky thought shit, nobody cares about your fucking cave Plato.

but you can feel the sunshine

thats exactly my point you fucking pretween.

This is similar to 'Cogito Ergo Sum'; I think, therefore I am. When all we can really know is our own mind, and that is the result of easily mislead perceptions like sight and sound, what can we really know is real? Well, we can't say that anything physical is real as it could simply be part of our imagination. Similarly, we could be imagining other people as being sentient when they're actually not. At that point it appears that nothing is real. The exception to this is your self; you are thinking enough to ponder this question, which means you have free will and a sense of self to some degree. Simply by thinking, you've proven you do in fact exist, even if only in concept. Everything else can be assumed to potentially not exist, though to think that so rigidly is somewhat missing the point Descartes was trying to make.

ironically that story Allegory of the Cave by Plato defines the thought process behind this entire thread.

I went to college too user, too bad the rest of these faggots didn't.

Well I'd be thankful they at least vote, but i'm not...and hopefully they don't.

Based on the development timeline for a newborn, I'd say OP is probably somewhere around 12-months old, and has somehow miraculously learnt to write.

Relevant: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_permanence

I'd flip that on it's head and say everything matters in a world without meaning. I don't think it's that nihilistic. For me, the fact we're so insignificant and meaningless is an excuse to assign our own meaning. As far as I'm concerned, that's trying to treat others how I'd like to be treated. I get where you're coming from with the whole 'nothing matters, don't worry about upsetting people', but I figure I don't want to make any else's pointless shitty existence any more pointless or shitty.

Live and let live, because nothing else really matters.

How do you know your 5 senses (*cough 21 *cough*) are adequate enough to perceive all of reality? You already know that frequencies of both sound and light exist outside your ability to perceive them.

How do you know reality is as it seems? Color doesn't actually exist. Your brain interprets signals from your eye and creates the color you see. So, if you were to see my yellow the way I see yellow, you might think it's a totally different color.

How do you know this isn't a simulation and what we perceive is simply what we're programmed to perceive?

How do you know you're not the only thing that actually exists and everything outside of you is actually just an interpretation or manifestation of your own mind?

2spoopy5me

exactly live and let live Sup Forumsro

i know what i know
and i know you're a jew.
fucking go back to counting your shekels globenstein.

I don't care what reality I live in.
That pic is hot AF.

>shekelstein
at least get the name right deutchlandfag

Nothing is real.
Therefore Hitler didn't do anything wrong.

But seriously, it's all probability waves. Nothing exists until it's observed. It's basic quantum mechanics.

To touch on the simulation thing; if we ever became technologically advanced enough to create a sim which 100% mirrored reality AND had the gumption to make it, then chances are we are currently living in a sim.

The first simulation would mirror the real world to the point of building a sim that mirrors their sim with 100% accuracy. That simulation would do the same, and that one the same and so on. You're left with simulations that create other simulations endlessly over time.

Given that this is the case, the chance of being in any one simulation or reality is 1/inf. If everything described here is capable of happening, the chance of us being real is 1/inf.

Simulation (probably) confirmed. We matrix now.

what im saying is that if you cant perceive something there is literally no way of knowing if its still even in reality

watching a game of futbol right now from brazil.
not sure if it real or not?
can fags help me with their logics?

exactly

>trying to sound smart when you're not.
>MFW

ill bet you perceive dicks in your ass from dudes with tits on this faggot website every night. no wait...i was wrong. you prefer dicks from animal people with tits in cartoon form.

go back to pol.

as long as you know if your not observing somthing how do you know if it exists?

especially considering things have been measured to change when observed, so they not only existed before observed, but changed afterwords.

this fucking pleb just got into jr college in canada. don't be mean to him.

...

Here's the thing: it doesn't have to mirror anything. The creators of the first simulation would have 15 eyes and tentacles, but created artificial intelligence good enough to be capable of original thought outside of it's original code. That intelligence would still only have the ability to perceive the world it's confined within.

A simulation doesn't mean there are players controlling us; it could mean we are thinking beyond our original programming. That actually makes it MORE likely that we are a sim.

/Thread.

Kind of. It's not that it doesn't exist. But it's moving around to fast, that it's practically random. Except if you get *really* good, you can time it so that when things crystallize in your field of view, it lands on the proper version of reality you were going for.

You can infer existence by observing the effects things have on one another. this has the advantage of occurring outside of our perspective and perception, therefore we can be sure that things exist.

take for example a leaf. You see this leaf, you know it's there. Now, if you were to suddenly appear 100 miles away from it, by your logic, it would not exist anymore, therefore when you returned to it, it would be in the same spot. However, in the time you were away, outside forces have caused it to move from where it was.

This is how we confirm existence.

Look up socrates that guys thinking is right up your alley

"All i know is i know nothing"

Greek philosopher, among other things.

Also, its a dense read but edmund husserls philosophy of phenomenology is along the lines your thinking, bro

It's one glance away from solipsism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

see already mentioned then tell us about dante's work and what is real and what isn't.

I like you.

True dat. The thing I mentioned (though I'm guessing you already know this seeing as you took an interest) is a legit philosophical theory and goes a lot deeper than I briefly explained. My post was just a easy version for Sup Forums so thanks for expanding on it.

/facepalm

Google double slit experiment. Literally fucking basic physics.

That applies soley to subatomic particles douchebag.

>staring at a tree
>turns around
>the tree doesnt exist anymore

Lololololol

Cheer bud. We're all just ants on a cosmic scale, and people who squish or fuck around with ants are assholes.

are you fucking serious

Just because someone uses the word "quantum" doesn't mean they're addressing advanced topics. Quantum mechanics was advanced maybe a century ago. If you don't understand at least the basics of probability mechanics at this point, then it's nobody's fault but your own. To put it into a colloquial analogy;

Quantum mechanics today is what steam engines were a century ago.

the fuck are you facepalming dumb nigger?
photons = data and data eventually is infinite...so...a summary of data is 'things'.
the fact that i highlighted this entire experiement and you chose to ...ride in on some high horse and mention it without even fucking thinking...means you thought of it after i posted it and it was your idea?

fucking jesus christ this thread really is for high school dropouts.

seriously.
lay off the dabs you fucking stoner.

Yall missing the point. If you recreate reality its not a fucking simulation. Its a another reality

Check out Tom campbells big toe on YouTube

It's frustrating hearing people or TV shows or whatever use 'quantum' as a buzzword. Kind of like how 'sonic' used to be. Quantum mechanics is just focusing on the spin of subatomic stuff. It's really dull for the most part.

Why does perception have to involve your 5 senses? For example, do you know the earth is round?

When you turn around, the tree is in a state of superposition. The probability that it will still be there when you turn around is very very high, but it's also possible that a car slammed into it, a lumberjack chopped it down, etc... You only know what state it was in while observing it.

Wow you are an idiot. L2read. What do you think he was talking about? An episode of Star Trek?

KEK'D

I don't disagree. If it mirrors the thing perfectly, who's to say it's not real?

See
My post was meant as a means of starting conversation rather than a proper guide into a really deep topic. Good point though, cheers for expanding on what I wrote.

you just went full potato.

exacty

Nice bait, oh wait you were serious?
Confirmed can't read/write or think.

So when driving the only thing I didnt sense from my car was taste. I could smell the exhaust, I could hear the engine, I could feel the steering wheel, and I could see my car completely. I then decided to tounge the steering wheel to experience all of my senses interacting with my car. In conclusion, my car is real. If i left my car and a nigger broke into it, then my car is still real, even when I'm away.

Basically OP, you're a God damn moron.

Here, just go watch Noein,
Its an anime thats very basis is that idea.
I should be right up your ally since your still in high school

this is called being a 1 year old. object permanence. Literally every person alive today has thought that at some point.

The implication of that experiment is that reality doesn't exist until it's observed.

In this specific example i would be able to hear/feel/sense if something happened to the tree. however speaking in a more General sense I think you're forgetting the capacity to use a priori knowledge to ascertain facts about reality outside the limits of the senses

> posting your theory to Sup Forums
> a bunch of people you can't see

fucking idiot

...

I don't need all 5 senses to know that OP will always be a faggot.

Well, bit of an overstatement. That's one school of thought, but the most common interpretation is that particles exist as both waves and solid matter simultaneously. There's a lot we don't understand about quantum mechanics.

>tard detected

The implication is of the dual wave- particle nature of light.

the only flaw

and that is why you failed middle school science.
the implication of the experiment is observing particles changes their behavior...but the end results are observed regardless of the change.

KEKKKK you are definitely a troll. enjoy jr college at legalized weed canada dot com

good god.

not to encourage him, but don't think you can have a priori knowledge that the world exists in this case. The argument is literally that there is no such thing as a priori knowledge of existence.,

If you're hearing, feeling, sensing what's happening, you're observing.

I assume he is talking about Schrödinger cat - where the lack of observation leaves the cat in 2 distinct states, neither of which exists until observed.

When I was a kid I had this crazy idea that what if reality and its laws changed constantly?
Take as an example, a universe where every ten seconds it randomly reforms in some way, except that all living things in that universe wouldn't remember the transformation and perceive it as if things had always been that way.
You know, the speed of light did vary at one point in scientific history. What if there are no constants?

No, it leaves the particles linked to the poison in two states. Even Schrodinger did not think the cat would literally be in two states at the same time. You could even suggest the cat counts as an observer.

The implication I understood from studying quantum mechanics is that the unifying field is consciousness. That the most elementary "particle" is in fact board states of various universes. It is not a question of whether a packet of energy goes one way or the other; the question is, what is the probability of experiencing universe in which it would always have gone the way it did?

Another way to look at it is to consider the double slit experiment from the perspective of the wave packet; when the slits are sufficiently small, the energy packet no longer has the physical capability of distinguishing the number of slits; hence why consciousness is the unifying field. Acquiring which way information in this experiment is impossible, because from the perspective of the energy packet, both slits are identical. If consciousness means a method for conveying information through space, then it is no exaggeration to say that quantum mechanics has completely turned reductionism on its head.

Before its detected, an energy packet travels in every direction possible. After its detected, an energy packet has only ever traveled in exactly the direction it needed to be detected where it did. Thus, physical reality is the process by which our minds continually select predetermined realities out of an infinite number of possibilities. You can't phrase that English. Choosing predetermined reality? Which is it? Choice, or predestination?

But it's what's happening. Very interesting stuff, from my perspective.

yeah there is no true answer till observed and by this logic everything does exist?

The double slit experiment is a way of understanding of light behaves as matter or as a wave. That has nothing to do with understanding of reality exists outside of our perception or if the reality we perceive is objective or subjective.

Its interesting to note that solid matter isnt actually solid. Matter is supposedly 99% empty space.

'we' meaning people who aren't actively involved in the field or study.

stop saying 'we'.
it's like living in a city with a football team and saying 'our team' ...most people don't follow your team, yet you call it 'our team', just because we all live in the same city?

no. not everyone falls into the 'we' category. but because you're stuck there you try to incorporate everyone in it. that's a horrible way of thinking that leads to mediocrity.

If you got this mad at nothing I want to see you play league or something bahaha

Assuming the only way knowledge can bee reliably acquired is through direct observation. I dont think thats completely true.

I think he did state the cat existed in 2 states - and that he was using it as a thought experiment having to do with quantum physics. I'm out of my depth here - but that is what I remember.

sure...keep telling that to blind people to make them feel good about themselves. 'who needs to see that light reflecting off of objects to let our brains know where those objects are, we can just stumble into them and find out the hard way. watch out for that BUS>.....ohhhhh

one less hungry mouth on welfare.

Read this.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment

Yeah, I can see that. Sounds like how simulations work to be honest; only dealing with stuff as it needs to be 'worked out'.

This Thread is starting to piss me off there is a difference between philosophy that is being used to enhance one's understanding of himself and his environment and then there is philosophy for the sake of complicating that reality because it's cool to imagine a world that doesn't exist it is extremely obvious that shit can exist without you seeing it touching it feeling it tasting it or smelling it.

I like this theory best, is there a name for it?

OPs argument is that literally all knowledge is acquired by direct observation - and that we have no way of proving beyond a doubt that object exists outside of our experience.

Sort of like - are you a man dreaming of being a butterfly? Or a butterfly dreaming of being a man.

I say 'we' as in the human race, retard. I used it to explain where 'we' are, as in those in the forefront of the field representing the rest of us retards.

Props for the most needlessly salty and pedantic Sup Forums post I've ever seen. That's saying something, you jabroni.

But this simulation would have to use analogue data in order to compute probability streams.

No amount of digital data can accurately reproduce even one analogue signal.

Calling reality a simulation is like calling trees machines. I mean. Sure. I guess. Except for all the factors that make them different from machines.

>predestination

Choice is byproduct of being forced to go through time in one direction

stopped at wikipedia.
that's your mistake right there user.
what the fuck are you even doing bringing wikipedia into a discussion involving actual education and fields of study?

why not just invite Ted from down the hall with his 8 foot bong over and we can talk about all kinds of realities, maybe he has some home made food with mushrooms and weed we can take to experience them...but because he has a wiki we should listen to him.

no thanks.

He was trying to point out how ridiculous the 'not defined until observed' school of thought was. Of course a cat can't be in two states at once; it was meant as a 'stop being so retarded' to people studying quantum mechanics in their early days.

Not that I'm aware of, but there's a TED Talk presentation about it.

youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg

then leave.

Fair comment. My post was just an off-hand thing, I wasn't meant to literally compare reality with a simulation.

But the "of course" part was actually incorrect.

The big bang was once a mock term, used to indicate "well of course the universe didn't just begin, in a flash of light, like a big BANG or something, that's retarded." And the name stuck, long after it became accepted dogma.

toss me 5 links proving the human race knows as much as you in current studies of quantum mechanics and i'll pretend you are part of their group. until then..you aren't part of shit. you are a fat piece of shit that quotes wrestling from the late 90's. your education is about as short as the bus you took to school.