"There is no spoon" - Physics may exists purely in the mind, matter due to mentation and observation.

[VirtualLarry]

Physics Is Pointing Inexorably to Mind

So-called “information realism” has some surprising implications.

getpocket.com

 

[Kaido]

 

[DigDog]

no

 

[DigDog]

ill explain it in a way which is suprisingly brief - because im just.that.smart.

all matter, can be interpreted at some point as a function. a brick of gold that appears solid is in fact empty space with few atoms in it, which again are made of entities that only exist statistically.

THAT is matter. that is in fact what we call a solid object. And yes, it's solid. The brick exists. It can hit you. It can function in the expected way of a solid object because, that's what it is.

So the whole argument is
A: "matter isn't real"
B: "so this brick can't hit me?"
A: "oh no, the brick is real".

 

[zinfamous]

ill explain it in a way which is suprisingly brief - because im just.that.smart.

all matter, can be interpreted at some point as a function. a brick of gold that appears solid is in fact empty space with few atoms in it, which again are made of entities that only exist statistically.

THAT is matter. that is in fact what we call a solid object. And yes, it's solid. The brick exists. It can hit you. It can function in the expected way of a solid object because, that's what it is.

So the whole argument is
A: "matter isn't real"
B: "so this brick can't hit me?"
A: "oh no, the brick is real".

The way I see it is that you can punch a cynic in the face a near-infinite number of times, without them ever believing that they are actually being punched in the face. And then maybe they die because they never believe it's happening.

But they never believed that it was happening, so did it ever happen?

To whom are we trying to prove natural laws to...and does it matter in the end?

 

[DigDog]

we really aren't. We've just observed that understanding physics allows you to build cool things, so we keep studying it. Right now we've come to the point where some experiements results are leaving us confused, but once they are solved, they will appear mundane. e.g. see the quantum entanglement explanation.
1. matter cannot affect other matter without *some* form of contact
2. experiment proves that matter can affect other matter without any form of contact
3. we know 1 is true, so we speculate based on this, and come to the conclusion that there was, in fact, contact. this, does in fact prove the multidimentionality of the universe, i.e. the phrase "outside of our dimension" is actually a real thing.

 

[sdifox]

42

 

[zinfamous]

we really aren't. We've just observed that understanding physics allows you to build cool things, so we keep studying it. Right now we've come to the point where some experiements results are leaving us confused, but once they are solved, they will appear mundane. e.g. see the quantum entanglement explanation.
1. matter cannot affect other matter without *some* form of contact
2. experiment proves that matter can affect other matter without any form of contact
3. we know 1 is true, so we speculate based on this, and come to the conclusion that there was, in fact, contact. this, does in fact prove the multidimentionality of the universe, i.e. the phrase "outside of our dimension" is actually a real thing.

I've smoked enough weed in my life to know that I might be wrong about many things.

 

[DigDog]

realted to this, but not directly, so new post.

1. i would encourage everyone to watch PBS Time Space. This is a entertaining, well made, easily explained, and grounded-in-reality Youtube show about physics.
2. i would encourage everyone to be weary of physics youtube shows (and others).

I'll make an example. A person whom i profundly loathe, Michio Kaku, or Blockhead, as i like to call him, is a world renowed actual physicist with some noteworthy work in his name.
He's also a sensationalist idiot, who loves to go on any tv show and explain how next week we will all be travelling through wormholes into an alterantive past.

Or, to put it in a more scientific way, he does nothing to make the common man understand the difference between "currently possible in abstract theory but extremely unlikely" and "not being done, but reasonably expected to become true in the future, pending further data".

Please note that often, physics investigates based on theories that are tenuous at best; it's a useful process, but normally it leads nowhere. So, phrases like "wormholes, could they exist" and "and if they do, could they lead us to another galaxy" are not TECHNICALLY wrong, but a honest physicist should know that rephrasing it as "tomorrow we could be using wromholes to travel faster than light" is bad information when used in a normal TV show.


So be weary of newspapers, tv shows, youtube videos, even ones with good math in them, but that don't know how to convey the impact of a scientific notion. For example, this very thread - matter isn't real. reality isn't real. it's just all information. uh, yeah, but when information of another car crashed into your own information of parked car, then you're gonna lose a lot of bank account dollar information to repair that door information.

 

[TheVrolok]

no

Literally entered this thread to post this. Love PBS SpaceTime.

 

[nakedfrog]

realted to this, but not directly, so new post.

1. i would encourage everyone to watch PBS Time Space. This is a entertaining, well made, easily explained, and grounded-in-reality Youtube show about physics.
2. i would encourage everyone to be weary of physics youtube shows (and others).

So be weary of newspapers, tv shows, youtube videos, even ones with good math in them, but that don't know how to convey the impact of a scientific notion. For example, this very thread - matter isn't real. reality isn't real. it's just all information. uh, yeah, but when information of another car crashed into your own information of parked car, then you're gonna lose a lot of bank account dollar information to repair that door information.

1. Yes
2. WARY

 

[IronWing]

2. WARY

'e over there. ==>

 

[nakedfrog]

'e over there. ==>

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

ill explain it in a way which is suprisingly brief - because im just.that.smart.

all matter, can be interpreted at some point as a function. a brick of gold that appears solid is in fact empty space with few atoms in it, which again are made of entities that only exist statistically.

THAT is matter. that is in fact what we call a solid object. And yes, it's solid. The brick exists. It can hit you. It can function in the expected way of a solid object because, that's what it is.

So the whole argument is
A: "matter isn't real"
B: "so this brick can't hit me?"
A: "oh no, the brick is real".

That's not exactly what they are driving at. The brick is a construct and not "a thing unto itself". That does not mean it cannot have an impact (pun intended), but that it exists is because of a relationship of things outside the brick and mind plays a part. Really, no one understands anything because no one is that smart in understanding the most fundamental things. A brick exists because of field interactions but why do those exist? What is fundamental and what is derivative and are we inherently able to understand how things really are? I'm thinking we are not up to it for a number of reasons. Also, there is no spoon.