Tulpa.info - metaphysics

the only thing I oblige myself for emotionally is always remaining in complete control so I don't show greed or fear

Even that last sense of "obligation" can drop. Not saying it has to

But greed or fear just the same are an impersonal happening

that's good

6:36 PM

with that though I could really see through the eyes of other people and I saw that all people are just the reflection of the same person in different forms. I could no longer blame them because I could understand them perfectly

Sweet!

6:38 PM

Yeah, not just reflections of the same person, but of what you called the "unconscious of the universe". Whether it's people, birds, fungi, rocks, water, galaxies, songs and memes and murderers (edited)

Unfastened Belts

Yeah, not just reflections of the same person, but of what you called the "unconscious of the universe". Whether it's people, birds, fungi, rocks, water, galaxies, songs and memes and murderers (edited)

it's true. I started to see my imposed visions blur between all these different things and it seems like the same patterns cropped up over and over again corresponding to symbolism, and there was a meaning behind everything

6:40 PM

then I saw people using them as symbols over and over again without realizing why, but it was always the same pattern

6:41 PM

it's the pattern of the chakras which correspond to the placement of each emotional center in a line along the spine, and that would influence how people perceive and interact with objects emotionally

6:42 PM

that's what I meant with

️ ⌛ ✡️

those are different shapes where the width is the strength of each chakra center

Unfastened Belts

Outside of the tulpa community, "metaphysical" just means general observations about the nature of life/the universe

That's definitely not the case, I've seen it used to mean "supernatural" in at least some other places.

Hmm fair enough!

11:25 PM

Guess I didnt fact-check that angle...

that is a beautiful metaphor

Unfastened Belts

Idk but are they? I read that this thing recently that the speed of light slightly varies at any given region of the universe

you don't need to look far to observe that, light goes slower depending on the medium! that's why prisms work the way they do. what you probably meant was speed of light in the vacuum, which should just be called speed of causality really

2:11 PM

ohhh @chroma , authors of Kurzgesagt and Anton Petrov would be absolutely devastated to see you are using their videos to support your metaphysics claims

2:17 PM

i'm sad i missed the conversation

2:18 PM

i especially liked the "you need to be less assertive" said by the least assertive person in the room, "just go off the room so i can play without you around!"

owo

2:41 PM

o

2:42 PM

i don't know which claims or why. I don't think they were intended as anything much more than illustrative of how science can shape our perception of the universe in which we presently find ourselves.

2:43 PM

sometimes that's toward a sense of mystery as science reveals a broad field of unknowns and spooky factors, like they just found a unicorn or something. https://phys.org/news/2021-04-black-hole-closest-earth-smallest.html

Black hole is closest to Earth, among the smallest ever discovered

Scientists have discovered one of the smallest black holes on record—and the closest one to Earth found to date.

2:44 PM

well, you started dropping links when you accepted the shift of burden of proof to you for the claims you were making, surely that was in order to support your claims at the time, not randomly start talking about sense of mystery? i mean the links were kind of random and relate to anything you said at the time so maybe it was the latter and it was just a diversion of conversation

2:59 PM

using anything that has "quantum" in the name for anything mystical is a sign of misunderstanding of the topic and/or spit to the face of the scientists that pushed the understanding of it forward (edited)

well, this is the #metaphysics channel ...

3:44 PM

isn't it allowed?

I think to laymen people think of "quantum" and see stuff like entanglement and hope there is some sort of mechanism which is essentially psionic in the brain. I don't even know what that person was trying to say about brains being annealing (a process used to find the minimum possible result from an equation using quantum fluctuations), but here's the thing: Quantum mechanisms are observable. They can rely on various materials; particles and wave types and the like. The claim that the brain is in any way a quantum device completely ignores that that brain isn't some closed container we can't observe. There's not something magical behind the brain because we can literally see it's not interacting with universal particles or waves in any unusual way. The only known situation that I know of that happening is in birds, and it's clearly an adaptation to allow them to navigate, rather than some sort of core functioning of how all brains work. And we know it happens because we can observe it happening.

yeah, but observations change a quantum system, don't they?

measurement, not observation

They don't change the fact it behaves in a quantum way.

but the universe doesn't seem to distinguish those two, does it?

When they talk about quantum systems a measurement includes any interactions with any other object, "observation" has been used in the past but that word has mislead a lot of people

3:47 PM

So, when a beam of light hits a wall, that's an "observation"

so an interaction

3:47 PM

between quantum isolated systems?

In order to show that the brain is a quantum device it would be relatively simple, all you'd need to do is look at its structure and locate a spot in which the brain decides to fire a neuron based on detecting something macroscopic. But the brain is a connection of neurons. We don't fully understand what it does, but we can see it relies on chemical interactions and bioelectricity.

among other things

They're all quantum, the current/best explanation I've seen for it is that quantum systems, pre-interaction are "not entangled" with everything else we call the universe, when they collide with something in our universe now we are all part of the same quantum "result" and dterministic physics is observed, not because the quantumness has gone away, but because it's now "part of our shared state" (edited)

3:49 PM

And we are one state, all entangled together, of all the other possible states that we don't observe because they aren't part of ours.

yeah among other things that we might not know right now, but you can't put "quantum" whenever there is something you can't understand or is outside of what science currently understands (edited)

3:50 PM

quantum of the gaps fallacy

yeah, sure, nobody should do that

Careful to keep civil here, this is a sensitive topic and it's going to keep getting worse if we keep being sarcastic/dismissive.

quantum isolated systems

Not all systems are quantum systems.

among other things

I'm really not sure what you're getting at here. If you know it operates on some other mechanism please do show me the science.

3:52 PM

Because neuroscience disagrees with you as far as I am aware.

it would seem to require a multidisciplinary approach, wouldn't it?

I think you are also mistaking perceived randomness for things that are probablistic

hey guyz, check this out https://www.iflscience.com/physics/physicists-bring-humanscale-object-to-an-almost-quantum-standstill-for-first-time/

Physicists Bring Human-Scale Object To An Almost Quantum Standstill...

When a quantum system is at its lowest possible energy, it is said that it is in its ground state. This state has now almost been achieved for a human-scal

I don't know if that's super applicable, that's an example of scientists cooling a human sized mass to an absolute zero total minimum temp, rather than quantum mechanics appearing for large scale objects

" The object was so still that it didn’t move more than one-thousandth the size of a proton."

It's certainly possible, mind, for us to have objects that large behaving in a quantum way, just vanishingly unlikely due to just how many interacts you're going to have with anything of that size

3:55 PM

What do you think the object being so still is proving? I'm not sure I see the relation.

to be fair i would rather read the source that ifl used to write this article, but they don't provide their source

It's just interesting. https://www.iflscience.com/physics/a-glass-nanosphere-becomes-first-macroscopic-object-under-quantum-standstill-in-free-space/

A Glass Nanosphere Becomes First Macroscopic Object Under Quantum S...

Scientists at ETH Zurich were able to levitate a glass nanosphere using laser light and slow down its motion to its lowest quantum mechanical state. This b

There's nothing crazy about the article, it's very belivable scientists were able to cool down a large object by a ton

When we observe something which is in some way based on entropy, we are bound to get results that appear random. But they are actually uniformly based on simply taking a measurement at a point where predicting something would be inpractical, rather than truly probabilistic as quantum science is. This is how computers and us generate not only random numbers, but I would posit how we behave unpredictably. But the core of those mechanisms is always to do with emotional chemicals and electro-chemical neural pathways formed over time, none of which is quantum in nature and so we have to conclude that it's pseudo-random, like a computer.

Reguile

There's nothing crazy about the article, it's very belivable scientists were able to cool down a large object by a ton

now you are using ton as a temperature unit, tomorrow you will use light year to describe time!

I don't understand what these articles are proving?

3:57 PM

A light year can describe time, it's just a year!

not for the poor photon!

We're out there looking at this kooky old edifice of how people understand and experience the world they live in. It's silly, this isn't conservation, it's opposition to progress, the way people seem to dwell in old paradigms, and now progress has continue to such a point that the schisms forming in culture are like themselves some weird isolating effect where we are no longer coupled in many ways to one another. Of course, that seems to bring out all sorts of things into the light, it's fascinating.

I suppose quantum stuff could happen on a quantum level, but otherwise it's just electrical signals and chemical changes that make your brain work. I suppose it's possible something more advanced is going on, but I don't know. I don't think we have the technology to know for sure yet.

So naturally, we attracted to the most progressive elements, the ones that really juxtapose in high contrast against the dishonest paradigms of the same people who attack esoteric culture.

old paradigms used to be new paradigms, they replaced them with scientific method, not with gut feeling

Because it's science pointing out how non-credible they are.

when new paradigms meet the requirements of scientific methods, sure

And how it was always just really terrible politics.

It has nothing to do with new or old. You're being objectively unempirical; making conclusions without having concrete sensory data.

but if you can believe anything because it's "progress", it's important to ask yourself if you care if what you believe is true, how do you make sure it's true, and if you care what you are telling others is true

this is the #metaphysics channel

yes it is!

4:05 PM

still important to keep those questions in mind

4:05 PM

maybe even more important

This is like a ritual to establish a space in which metaphysics may exist, little a bubble in a crazy hostile land.

4:06 PM

That we call Arizona.

4:07 PM

Now that science says "yes, the universe is spoopy as f", we may proceed without any detractors, whose power has now been sapped with cold hard science.

4:07 PM

You see?

4:07 PM

It's that simple

where does science say that?

It doesn't have to.

it's you that say it based on scientific discoveries

Are you saying we can't understand science or we're incapable of understanding the universe? I'm not sure if I'm following?

the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, identity, time, and space.

"they would regard the question of the initial conditions for the universe as belonging to the realm of metaphysics or religion"

abstract theory with no basis in reality.

"the very subject of milk pricing involves one in a wonderland of accounting practice and a metaphysics all its own" These are two of the definitions of metaphysics google provides. I am interested chiefly in the former. The latter is fine, but they are hypotheses I can and will question.

Are you saying we can't understand science or we're incapable of understanding the universe? I'm not sure if I'm following?

@A long kiss goodnight - jump "yes, the universe is spoopy as f",

4:08 PM

It's that simple.

it's spoopy to you

You seem to think that because you are making a position that it should be unquestioned just because you're in a place that acknowledges uncertainty.

This is the #metaphysics channel.

Do you think metaphysicians don't question other metaphysicians?

4:09 PM

If so you haven't read your basic religious history.

Haven't we been questioning your presence here all along?

Not particularly, you seem to.

guys, this is boring.

4:10 PM

byenow.

tailpa | Starlight

Are you saying we can't understand science or we're incapable of understanding the universe? I'm not sure if I'm following?

@A long kiss goodnight - jump "yes, the universe is spoopy as f",

I see. I disagree, even though the universe is complicated I believe we can have a good rough understanding. I don't think we will ever 100% understand the universe, but I think it's worth the effort to try.

You'll never understand all the science that exists in the world right now, nor is that science complete in any absolute existential sense, and when you're finished reviewing all that, there'll be a great deal more to review very soon. And there are all kinds of dead ends and mistakenly abandoned lines of research, even cases where we discover ancient civilizations well understood things science is only just now beginning to realize in bits and pieces. At some point, you do have to integrate a view of existence and reality, and you do have to take information coming at you to inform those views if you want to be connected to any of that, but it's never a complete, the complete, view of things. Someone has to step back and start piecing together meaning, and that is and as far as I know has always been a spiritual domain.

I don't think so. I think it can be, and that many people need it to be a spiritual domain because of how their particular brain works. For me though, my integrated view is that we are in a beautiful interlocking mechanism. That there is nothing but matter and energy; that no aether exists. And that beauty is enough for me. The only adjustments I would make are to mortality and entropy, both of these things are to be conquered in time and I consider mankinds ultimate foe.

All you need in order to avoid needing a spiritual domain in this way is just an ability to accept and reckon with uncertainty.