KHinfcube22 Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 Originally posted by superchump Time is not controlled by one's mind. The mind just perceives time differently in some cases. The events around us flow as they normally would. If I were somehow able to start perceiving my environment much quicker, as if watching a slow-motion movie, I don't slow the event down. I just see it differently then others. The event still happens along the natural flow of time. But the speed one percieves time is the speed of time one is in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 Incorrect. The rate of time passing for identical atomic clocks has been shown to obey the Lorenz Transform for time, and is independent of any 'mind'. Unless you're claiming atomic clocks can think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri Incorrect. The rate of time passing for identical atomic clocks has been shown to obey the Lorenz Transform for time, and is independent of any 'mind'. Unless you're claiming atomic clocks can think But the Jackeov Theory supports my Idea perefectly! But I guess you don't know that famous russian scientist. He invented Lemon Murang Pie, and the Insane Asylum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 But the Jackeov Theory supports my Idea perefectly! But I guess you don't know that famous russian scientist. He invented Lemon Murang Pie, and the Insane Asylum. I'm running out of sarcastic ways to imply that you're an idiot, you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted May 14, 2003 Share Posted May 14, 2003 No I haven't, but as I have said this is Trans-dimensional travel, not Time Travel. And even with parallel universes, going to another universe to kill your grandfather is not altering that universe, for that universe already exist as your "Native" Universe already exists. And in fact would be a part of your "native" universe. Which level of parallel universe are talking about? In my most favored one, the Level 3 quantum universe, the future is a probable occurance. If you have 6 choices for lunch, and you pick a salad, you are only viewing 1/6 of the reality, or wave function (and there's only one wave function). Therefore, in the Grandfather paradox, your grandfather is dead and is alive at the same time. So, in a quantum universe, the universe is not and is being altered in the sense that your grandfather is dead and alive. Or, in a Level 2 multiverse, a new , alternate universe is created unlike the quantum universe where everything just randomly branches out. Trans-demensional or not, the parallel universe theory should be considered. In a level 4 multiverse, physical laws are not the same as they are in this universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted May 15, 2003 Share Posted May 15, 2003 Originally posted by MajinVegeta Which level of parallel universe are talking about? In my most favored one, the Level 3 quantum universe, the future is a probable occurance. If you have 6 choices for lunch, and you pick a salad, you are only viewing 1/6 of the reality, or wave function (and there's only one wave function). Therefore, in the Grandfather paradox, your grandfather is dead and is alive at the same time. So, in a quantum universe, the universe is not and is being altered in the sense that your grandfather is dead and alive. Or, in a Level 2 multiverse, a new , alternate universe is created unlike the quantum universe where everything just randomly branches out. Trans-demensional or not, the parallel universe theory should be considered. In a level 4 multiverse, physical laws are not the same as they are in this universe. And in some Universes this may be correct, while in others its not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHRISCUNNINGHAM Posted May 15, 2003 Author Share Posted May 15, 2003 now you are making unjustified statements about the mind and perception. what is so special about them that they can be teleported back in time, but not matter. Because time is compelely relative to the observer, and observations are made by the mind. Moreover, time is an illusion, and in fact has no real existence.. Why? If one made the most accurate clock, he would see that "one second" is equal to eternity.... and n fact time never passes, nor does the clock ever tick... And if you plan to refute my previous statement with "it is beleived that time is not continuous, and "ticks" according to Planck's Constant", I ask..... What is this "ticking" relative to?? How can one have a number that can be made smaller, yet is the minimum for the flow of existence, this would suggest that there is something in between these "ticks", hence something that is exclusive of existence and,consequently, paradoxical. Which level of parallel universe are talking about? In my most favored one, the Level 3 quantum universe, the future is a probable occurance. If you have 6 choices for lunch, and you pick a salad, you are only viewing 1/6 of the reality, or wave function (and there's only one wave function). Therefore, in the Grandfather paradox, your grandfather is dead and is alive at the same time. So, in a quantum universe, the universe is not and is being altered in the sense that your grandfather is dead and alive. Or, in a Level 2 multiverse, a new , alternate universe is created unlike the quantum universe where everything just randomly branches out. I agree that when one picks one of 6 salads, he is veiwing 1/6 of reality(excluding all other factors of course), however I cannot aggre that it branches out. My hypothesis is that all "possible" universes exist simultaneously. And one only perceives the unvierse that he exists in. Everything is laid out before hand, and we are simply following one path. Relative to us it appears as if we are making the decisions in our universe, however we are simply making the decision because we are supposed to make the decision. I am still working out the why and the how, but so far it seems irrefutable. For if a man was controlling your mind...how would you know?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted May 15, 2003 Share Posted May 15, 2003 And in some Universes this may be correct, while in others its not. I fail to see your point. I am simply pointing out it should be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted May 15, 2003 Share Posted May 15, 2003 My hypothesis is that all "possible" universes exist simultaneously. This is what I don't understand. Simultaneous occurances are meaningless in Relativity, right? And one only perceives the unvierse that he exists in. That's what I said....but a little differently. In a quantum universe, the reality is a probablity ratio described by a wave function. Therefore, as I showed in the salad example, we don't exist in seperate universes in a quantum universe. This is the one multiverse that exists all around us, so to speak. Whereas, in a Level 2 multiverse, the universes are seperate. For example, in a Level 2 multiverse, a new universe is created due to the fact that in some regions of space, theoretically, space stops stretching and consequently, the symmetry in that region breaks thus creating a new universe. Everything is laid out before hand, and we are simply following one path. Relative to us it appears as if we are making the decisions in our universe, however we are simply making the decision because we are supposed to make the decision. What about free will? You imply there is no free will. I'd like to hear more about it. I see what you mean. Take the salad example: 6 probabilties, 1 choice for you as an individual. So, 6 realities branch out from your one choice, salad over other foods. It only seems like you are being induced to choose salad simply because you're in a certain universe. What if another you in another universe wanted salad too? Is that what you're getting at? If it is, then I have a simple answer: A quantum universe is entirely random. It branches out, according to the probabilties. It's sort of like saying "what if I chose pizza over salad?", "what if I wasn't even hungry at all" Both of these scenarios have there own realities, yet still in one wave function. There is freewill. You see, a quantum universe only branches out according to the decisions and choices you make. Otherwise, it would all be meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHRISCUNNINGHAM Posted May 15, 2003 Author Share Posted May 15, 2003 There is freewill. You see, a quantum universe only branches out according to the decisions and choices you make. Otherwise, it would all be meaningless. I understand, and can agree with what the quantum unverse suggest. But the above is where it gets a bit irksome for me. I am not sure why and how it would be as I have proposed, however it seems too logical to be dismissed.... ...the matrix.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM I understand, and can agree with what the quantum unverse suggest. But the above is where it gets a bit irksome for me. I am not sure why and how it would be as I have proposed, however it seems too logical to be dismissed.... ...the matrix.... It is all simple. Free will is an illusion. We only "think" we make disitions, (my spellings atrocias, note the bad spelling,) when it is all already laid out. The future is now. The past is Now. The present is now. Everything that has alrready ready happened, is happening "now" for those who live in the past. (Ok, all that last sentence makes no sense.) Now or the time. I almost completely agree with criscunningham. He has the basics, and some more, of what I was tryin to explain. There was only one thing that I couldn't explain. What happens to time when one sleeps? I mean, a person only dreams for twenty minutes at a time. What happens the rest of the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 It is all simple. Free will is an illusion. We only "think" we make disitions, (my spellings atrocias, note the bad spelling,) when it is all already laid out. The future is now. The past is Now. The present is now. Everything that has alrready ready happened, is happening "now" for those who live in the past. (Ok, all that last sentence makes no sense.) I can understand what you mean. Decisions could be an illusion because for every decision you make, there is one wave function that describes the whole reality. But, I still instinctively believe that decisions are not illusions. Think about it; if there is such a think as probabiltiy, random-ness, then there should be decsions. Decisions are random. For example, the 'first' decision you make is what creates a premise for the other probabilities that are created. But this is just a guess. Now or the time. I almost completely agree with criscunningham. He has the basics, and some more, of what I was tryin to explain. There was only one thing that I couldn't explain. What happens to time when one sleeps? I mean, a person only dreams for twenty minutes at a time. What happens the rest of the time? What do you mean? Time exists whether or not youre asleep or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 It is all simple. Free will is an illusion. We only "think" we make disitions, (my spellings atrocias, note the bad spelling,) when it is all already laid out. The future is now. The past is Now. The present is now. Everything that has alrready ready happened, is happening "now" for those who live in the past. (Ok, all that last sentence makes no sense.) Quantum physics would tend to disagree, at least on some level. In any case, the illusion of free will is as good as free will to all intents and purposes; empirically, there is no difference, so how can you justify your argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Everything that has alrready ready happened, is happening "now" for those who live in the past. (Ok, all that last sentence makes no sense.) It does make sense, for someone who believes the paast exists. In a quantum universe (I admit it, I'm obsessed with the QM universe!), since all the events in the universe branch out, the past must exist. In order for the present to exist, it needs to branch out from the past. Of course, I don't believe the branching out is literal. So I'm not sure how I should take this. Does anyone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 Free will is an illusion. Random-ness is a illusion. The chaos theory in general is an illusion. We only believe these things are real because we THINk they are real, but when they are really illusions. At leasts that what I would say if I believed in that stuff. Everyone has a destiny, it can't be avoided. All is an illussion, and nothing is real. Isn't it bliss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 Free will is an illusion. Random-ness is a illusion. The chaos theory in general is an illusion. We only believe these things are real because we THINk they are real, but when they are really illusions. At leasts that what I would say if I believed in that stuff. Everyone has a destiny, it can't be avoided. All is an illussion, and nothing is real. Isn't it bliss? what is being eluded though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM What is this "ticking" relative to?? The Spinner Constant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHRISCUNNINGHAM Posted May 18, 2003 Author Share Posted May 18, 2003 The Spinner Constant. Elaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted May 18, 2003 Share Posted May 18, 2003 Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM Elaborate. It's an in-joke for about 4 people and would take too long to explain. Believe me you aren't missing much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted May 20, 2003 Share Posted May 20, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 Free will is an illusion. Random-ness is a illusion. The chaos theory in general is an illusion. We only believe these things are real because we THINk they are real, but when they are really illusions. At leasts that what I would say if I believed in that stuff. Everyone has a destiny, it can't be avoided. All is an illussion, and nothing is real. Isn't it bliss? As Nikola Tesla put it, there must be a rule behind everything. Rules are the basis of the universe as we know it, or to be more specific, vibrations are what make the basis of the universe. Therefore, there must be a rule to this illusion. You seem to be hinting on Solipism (sorry, i can't spell it right). Solipism, if you don't know what it is, is a philosophical belief that states that everything you see is only real to you. Reality, in a Solpistic view is a result of chemical reactions and other chaotic reactions in the brain. This is paradoxical in the sense that if what you see is not real, how do you know you are real? Because you're conscious? What if you're really subconsciously conscious? How do you know you are physically alive? Then this brings up the paradoxical existence of spirits. Reality is the result of the sensations that the mind senses. A chair for example, is a chair because you sense it is. It feels like a chair, the structure is like a chair. The definition of a chair: "A piece of furniture consisting of a seat, legs, back, and often arms, designed to accommodate one person. " The definition is based on physical sensations. Therefore, it is real. Reason 1: If it wasn't real, you wouldn't sense it. What I mean be sense is that it feels like a chair. It has seat, legs, back and is "designed to accomedate one person". And for most of us, we see it. Light that bounces of the chair interacts with chemicals in the eye. All this cannot be an illusion, and these caan't be simoltaneous reactions that come out of no where, unless of course you have reason to say so otherwise. If everything wasn't real, then niether would you exist. It would be illogical for you to exist in a void. You could say the void and you are real....but the void doesn't have any stimuli to give you sensations of any kind. In conclusion, everything is real. THIS IS NOT THE MATRIX. :bs: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted May 20, 2003 Share Posted May 20, 2003 Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM Because time is compelely relative to the observer, and observations are made by the mind. Moreover, time is an illusion, and in fact has no real existence.. Why? If one made the most accurate clock, he would see that "one second" is equal to eternity.... and n fact time never passes, nor does the clock ever tick... And if you plan to refute my previous statement with "it is beleived that time is not continuous, and "ticks" according to Planck's Constant", I ask..... What is this "ticking" relative to?? no real existance? what about relativity?`what is an "observer"? what is a "mind"? why shouldn't the clock ever tick? I never said that time is not continuous, and I never planned to. the planck time is merely the smallest meaningful time. why does it have to tick relative to anything? and you can have discrete things. you cannot say that simply because something may be "mathematically" smaller than a given number it can be smaller in reality: electrons are discrete, so why can't you have half an electron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 21, 2003 Share Posted May 21, 2003 Don't make baby jesus cry by saying you can split hither-to elementary particles. It's wrong on so many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted May 21, 2003 Share Posted May 21, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri Don't make baby jesus cry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 21, 2003 Share Posted May 21, 2003 Just popping in to say that I'm shocked and appauled about redward's comment about the electron. The Dude out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted May 21, 2003 Share Posted May 21, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri Just popping in to say that I'm shocked and appauled about redward's comment about the electron. The Dude out. I never said you could split the electron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now