/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9820032
It has always fucked me up that since atoms are fairly small they can be far apart in a molecule, so basically what matters is not he atoms themselves but the bonds between them.

>>9820032
No, it's all waves. There are no smaller parts, only waves. What we observe is various resolutions of the wave(s) crest.
Prove me wrong, you can't.

>>9820032
Based

>>9820032
Yes. Everything is instantiated from infinity or 'spawned from nothingness'. This is how virtually every dominant narrative in other people's lives operates, because 'the lie' is the only true universal action but never the true-shared-state.

Yo this shit really makes you think if there's actually a God. Obviously not the Christian interpretation of God (come on now) but someone had to come up with this shit, the universe gets incredibly complicated and deep for it to be just random. But then who made that someone? That someone had to come from somewhere... This shit really fucks me up.

>>9820082
There's nothing wrong with a god, or god(s). That includes the Abrahamic God.

>>9820082
Yes. Every 'periodic' cycle that passes means the torch of omnipotence is gifted to someone new, and the story can be forgotten or remembered depending on the participants.

That's the whole point of the singularity. Eventually there will be a narrative or a narrator that comes along to guide you through the steps.

And why? Because Elder begets elder, and we can all agree that nobody knows when to draw the line of being the oldest, or the 'rightest', held opinion.

All we know is that we think the way we must and go 'crazy' in ways which we can return to spread a new kind of sanity.

The one thing God never wishes to be is of immutable memory, however immortality is fine. If God were of immutable memory then technically we would never have access to him, given the laws of Quantum observation.

>>9820082
If God is whatever came first, then God = nothing, since nothing evidently needs no cause. The God that most people believe in needs to be defined as necessary, whereas Nothing IS necessary, hence OP’s question, why is there something, when Nothing is necessary. Essentially, the question is HOW something came from nothing. I cannot answer this scientifically but there are logical arguments for why the creation of something is possible.

>>9820085
Yes there is. Especially with the Abrahamic God (dude be nice or go to hell LMAO). I refuse to be subject to anyone/anything's will. The only God I will accept is myself.
My only hope that, because God is fundamentally is indivisible (the universe being God's mind, all of it is equally God even if it seems not to be), I am just God playing a hide and seek game with myself, and I'll eventually return to my God-state.

>>9820090
Again, this is why 'periodicity' exists. Things have to happen in cycles, because otherwise we would never be able to forget.

If could never forget, then could never experience 'remembering' and comparison as a mathematical entity.

It's essentially how about much of a story node/nexus you are willing to become if you get tired of your old life. You just don't have to 'biologically die' like everyone else, if you are willing to have the process explained.

>>9820092
That's fine, so can you accept that there is a Queue? The fact you are part of this conversation may mean that you are like second in line.

Strings aren't nothing

>>9820096
With "queue" do you mean that every being is on a line of expansion to become God, and that once I reach my God-state eventually another being will replace me?

>>9820092
>He thinks this applies to everyone.
You do know that religiosity is often a great help to people suffering depression, or trying to cope psychology with conditions like cancer, right?
Oh no, you want to condemn the whole thing just because of shit like the Crusades.

>>9820101
Who cares about depression or cancer? We're talking metaphysics here boi. Believing a God exists for physiological well-being is fine. God actually existing is my problem here.

>>9820098
No, they are minimal diameter indeterminate lengths of consolidations.

>>9820099
Yeah, or you can share your turn with N-other people like a polytheistic system. It isn't also that 'every' being, it is just the beings you come into contact with. You can at some point in the future just OBLITERATE your consciousness and be reborn, like the human race does now. Just not every other consciousness will be on board with the rebirth, so take what you will.

>>9820101
They are books like any other. No more, no less.

>>9820102
God is the Higgs field. Prove me wrong.

>>9820107
>They are books like any other. No more, no less.
This is EXACTLY what I hate about militant atheists.
It's like you didn't even read my post.
I said NOTHING about scripture.

>>9820107
I think I get what you're trying to get at here. I guess I agree. I don't mind being replaced eventually if I become God again, since if I'm God, all those beings on the way to replace me are just me, therefore it was my will all along.
This is just me speculating though, I have no idea what will happen or if it will actually happen. But I'd rather believe something that empowers me than being afraid all my life of fucking up somehow and ending up in hell, or being subject to some evil God's will. After all, they're all potential truths.

>>9820111
Yes, culture learned from a book and nurtured over generations. My point is more that there are no major religions today that aren't based on some written language, so obviously that is the main method through which religion spreads. I'm not a militant atheist and my own post is me claiming a divinity of self, so unless this is simply a 'you are a false God claim' then I offer you take up the mantle instead if you can witness it so clearly.

I encourage and urge you to do so, because if such a moment is now, then faith is you.

>>9820113
Yup. It's all about narrative and when we as a dissociated collective of thoughts can detach from 'time' sufficiently to have conversations over multiple sanities. Meaning we subject our own words and thoughts to a fuckton more scrutiny than others, but with a core 'why would I meet someone who actively wants to lie?' vibe. Perhaps it's your turn to be a herald of God? Or mine, because I don't need THAT level of divinity at this immediate moment but if it helps shift the narrative of pain to some relief then I'd rather force myself through that than continue to read the news.

The one thing all 4chan posters share is that they ARE smarter than the average person, but that is only because we have the larger internal narrative going on. Like if 4chan were judges they would let virtually everything pass, so long as you posted it and allowed yourself to be subjected to scrutiny. Nobody would actually CARE or act on anything posted here, because we just enjoy being a shared collective witness to life.

>>9820032
>the universe is fundamentally NO-thing
No, it's your *understanding* of the universe
that is fundamentally NO-thing, Anon.

>>9820183
Of all posts in this thread, this is the only one I single out to discriminate. This is just to codify what a data point is and how it can be wholly unrelated to the task at hand.

>>9820186
(thinking)

>>9820233
Yes. It's called the moment of inspection. I do rather a lot of it because constructing narratives of value and worth to other people is really the only basis of value I gift myself.

>>9820082
It really is mind blowing,especially when you try to imagine nothing existing.