/sci/ - Science & Math

duh

>>6700335
this is an understanding not many comprehend anon.

it is also why so many great scientists are religious or into metaphysics.

the question of ultimate origin may never be answered, and that is a good thing

We are the universe looking at itself. We are the magic unfolding. Everything existing is in a state of pure ecstasy. This is the universal truth not found in any textbook.

>>6700335
science provides only models of reality that have ranges of applicability. It's the scientists that make the leap to believing that these models constitute universal truths about our universe. Every model is one experiment from being proven wrong.

>>6700350
We are the universe's way of funposting in itself

Taking a bunch of drugs and talking mysteriously won't get you any closer to "truths about the universe".

>>6700350
where's this picture from?

>>6700420
This

Fuck off /x/

>>6700420
How do you know that? Maybe drugs enable akternate perceptions in which descriptions are not as important as direct experience.

400BC
>Science can tell us about motion but it will never EXPLAIN the heavenly bodies

Year 1000
>Okay, okay, it can explain the stars and planets but it will never explain WHY they behave the way they do

1700
>Okay fine, science can explain that shit, but it can never tell us about how the universe was in the PAST

1950
>Okay, fine, you got me, it can explain the past, but science will never be able to tell us about the universe in the FUTURE, because you can't do experiments on the future

2014
>Fuck, okay you can predict the future of the universe with science, but you'll never be able to understand WHY it exists in the first place

2034
>Jesus christ, okay I'll admit you figured that out, but you'll never be able to explain WHY we're able to explain WHY the universe is the way it is

2054
>Okay, alright, sure, you managed to understand that, but science will never be able to explain why non commutative W* quantum superconformal topological Barnett algebras explain why the multiverse is an exact solution to vortex equations for the XXX Heisenberg spin chain with triangular boundaries and Gaudin model within a single chiral gauge superfield on moduli spaces of curves of genus zero

>>6700354
Being proven wrong is deprecated...
We do the experiment first, then shoe-horn the prediction/observation into the model..

It's practically broken?

symbols are the only way we can understand the universe

therefore science, a field that specializes in the study of symbolic representations of reality, is the closest we can come to true understanding

You'd do better to observe, then extrapolate a bunch of different predictions/models, then the experiment...
Predicting an observation is pretty dull

* when you've already observed it

Look the purpose of the universe is a waste of time. Science only builds models and predictions for the chaos of the universe

>>6700679
No one is saying science is useless.

>>6700354
This guy gets it.

>>6700706
>Being proven wrong is deprecated...
when I'm wrong I learn something, but then I'm not normal

>>6700335
>The world is more than symbols
How do you know the world is more than symbols?

>But you can never know why it exists in the first place.
Or that is simply not a coherent question. Did you ever consider that?

>>6700760
that's a pretty nice quote...
I'd be quite happy to be proven wrong, but the last good prediction i am aware of is probably einstein's... maybe hawkin's if he didn't cheat =)

Not like he had a high speed space-ship lying around?

It's better to know less but understand more, than know more but understand less?

>>6700420
exactly

>>6700335
Humans think and understand everything through symbols anyway. Non-symbolic knowledge is not compatible with human thought.

>>6700777
>not a coherent question
i thought the same thing. 'why does unvierse exist?' or "what is the purpose of the universe?" are nonsensical questions to me. humans ascribe purposes to objects because it helps use understand our world (process information) and hence, aids in our survival

>>6700871
You must be joking. Is the experience of smell the same thing as symbolic definition of smell?

>>6701190
You're a symbolic definition of smell.

>>6701190
wtf is this

>>6700335

holy shit this is some next level retardation.

I knew you 14 year old scientists were special but this is really something different.

I can't wait for you to look back on this and thank fuck christ you didn't make this a Facebook post.

>>6700420
this. Close the thread.

>>6700335
The world is also more than neuronal activity. You can never go beyond the symbols your own brain uses so why not keep with science and see how far it takes you?

>>6700420
This guy got it right

>>6700439
Not him but I know it because I saw it in an LSD trip

>>6700679
>Barnett algebras

Is this a real thing?

>>6701190
Symbol. From Latin symbolum, which means token or sign, literally "that which is thrown or cast together,"

A smell =/= that what is being smelled. Moreover, you take a bunch of stuff together and say it is a stinking heap (of shit for example). In other words, a smell is a symbol.

>>6701268
So your perceptional awareness is the same as a symbol for perceptual awareness?

So when you say "perceptual awareness" that is exactly the same as the actual processes that comprise perceptual awareness?

And when you have a large knowledgebase that describes the movement of a hand (3,000,000+ words), is that the same as the moving of the hand?

How can you be so confused? The symbols aren't reality. The best symbols can do is approximate reality. And they don't do a very good job at it, either. Otherwise please go find a blind person and explain to them how things look like. Since symbols are the same thing as reality, you won't have any problems with that, right?!

I don't think anyone on this board is even capable of having a unique thought. Judging by the replies in this thread, I guess you are just really naive about the world you live in.

You confuse symbols for reality and when someone reminds you that you're doing this, what you say is "symbols ARE reality". This is not funny or sad, this is bloody tragicomic.

Whatever. Enjoy your symbolic world. Confuse it with reality until the day you die. Maybe in those final moments before your death you will finally realize that the world is not a symbol.

Idiots.

>>6700439
drugs entertain the masses. esp alcohol, marijuana and tobacco. Just another vice on their lives. LSD was synthesized and DMT is natural. It is nothing more than biology and us experimenting with it. Whatever psuedo-intellectual discussions you have when youre fucked out of your mind on various drugs does not fall in here. real science comes from tedious and insanely meticulous work paired with lots of coffee and ate nights. It does not come from some lower class night of booze and pot. Fucking pleb.

>>6701420
>life is nothing more than X
Even if you reduce everything you know about, you can never reduce the irreducable fact that you exist.

Please actually think about what you're saying.

It's sad that some (many? most?) people can take LSD and not have the transcendent experience. I think it takes a certain type of abstract intelligence to realise the significance.

Reminder that everything you've ever thought or experienced has been filtered through your brain, so it's clear that playing with the filter reveals information. You can't study a system without perturbing it.

>>6701437
Maybe with LSD.

I don't think there's anyone in the world that takes a sufficient dose of DMT and doesn't break through.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keJGvy9sKWs

>>6701403
>I can see reality in his naked form unlike you mere humans who always need a medium

>>6701468
You can do it as well. In fact every perceptual experience you ever had in your life was non-symbolic.

Now go and false deduce someone else's argument.

>>6700335
We're fortunate to have OP's word salad to explain the world to us

>>6701470
Why in Gods name have we been making such a big thing of the scientific method? Just ask Anon the Oracle what's up, seeing he has direct access to the natural world.

>>6700335
But it can tell us that, as there is no such thing as causality outside of the universe (given that causality must exist within a temporal framework, ie the universe), there is little sense in looking for a cause of the universe, or a reason why it is.

>>6700679
I hardly want to agree with you. Hope you're right.
>>6700420
>>6700354
/thread

>>6701420
you started out ok but then descended into some weird classist fantasy

you don't understand the role of perception yet
you haven't got any experimental data to draw on because you consider it to be a plebeian activity

>Science only offers symbolic understanding of the world

Mmm... I'm pretty sure Science provides us with empirically verifiable evidence of observable phenomena.

>>6702046
>Anon the Oracle
top kek

Newsflash: humans can only interact with the world through symbols. Every pretentious claim in this thread is itself made of symbols and arrived at via symbols, even those symbols that denounce symbols and deny that they are symbols.

>>6701403
>>6701470
Get a load of this guy.

Your own consciousness, whatever processes are going on in your brain, they are made up of symbols. And here you are thinking that another layer of symbols on top of that changes everything.

>>6703600
>>6703600
Is gravity a symbol?

>>6703597
That gave me semantic satiation.

>>6700335
what's this philosophy bullshit doing in /sci/?