/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4853930]

I'm high so humor me for a bit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kr-9OzRbxs#t=3m0s

I remember watching a documentary a couple years back where the top scientists in the world were confronting the uncomfortable truth that the Big Bang Theory was a shaky bit of mess, and were try to formulate a more plausible (and presumably more accurate) model for space-time itself.

One such theory was that there is "no succession of time" (as the test subject in the youtube video above presciently claims 40 years ago). That all events and cause-effect is happening now--this now--and that our minds interpret the various signals and sensory-responses in the manner we currently see them: cause A happens proceeded by effect B, etc.

The video is a documentary covering the scientific experiments performed on LSD test subjects. The interviewee explains as best he can what he's experiencing.

Who here is brave enough to confront the sometimes-uncomfortable notion that what we accept as reality is only an illusion constructed by our minds to free our bodies to pursue the physical things that we need to keep our physical selves alive: food water sex partner etc.

Sounds like LSD freed that man from this reality to explore the Universe itself.

Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.4853948]

Come on /sci/. Don't make me go to /pol/. This insight would be lost on those knuckle-dragging stormtroopers.

(Although because it is government prohibition that is preventing others from experimenting with the drug it is also the government that is keeping them entrapped in this manufactured reality, so it is politics-related).

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4853951]

>>4853930
>big bang theory
>in doubt
What? Citation needed.

[Anonymous No.4853959]

The 70's sparked a movement that couldn't completely blossom without the internet, this shift in consciousness will happen much faster.

[Anonymous No.4853960]

>>4853951

It was a History or Sci Network documentary (one of those Through the Wormhole type). I'll see what I can find on the series of Google © Owned series of tubes.

[Anonymous No.4853964]

How exactly does that view of time change anything at all? It doesn't seem to.

[Anonymous No.4853971]

>>4853964

I see your point, but perhaps it does in a different manner of speaking.

Does it matter that we understand how the atom works? No, we still understood how the world around us would generally behave whenever we did x y or z long before the 1940's.

But if we are to get a better understanding about WHY things are the way they are, then understand how space-time is constructed would be an obviously important step.

[Anonymous No.4853984]

>>4853971

I hope you're not saying we knew as much about cause and effect of so very many parts of physics, chemistry, and biology back in the 40s as we do now.

Anyway, it's generally stated very clearly all the time that nobody knows what time is and how it works by almost every scientist(barring the pseudo-scientists).

[Anonymous No.4854004]

>>4853984
>I hope you're not saying we knew as much about cause and effect of so very many parts of physics, chemistry, and biology back in the 40s as we do now.
No, clearly not. That's why I said we understood how things would _generally_ behave whenever we interacted with our physical universe.

Which is kind of exactly what I said in the OP.

>Anyway, it's generally stated very clearly all the time that nobody knows what time is and how it works by almost every scientist(barring the pseudo-scientists).
Well, that's kind of my point. If we are truly searching for the reason behind what we perceive around us then understanding what space-time is is crucial.

I'm sensing you're too uncomfortable exploring this aspect of our Universe and reality itself, though.

[Anonymous No.4854007]

JIMMIES RUSTLED!!??

>2012
>not having Satan guard your Jimmies

http://www.joyofsatan . org/
http://www.angelfire . com/empire/serpentis666/Outsiders.html BUT I IS AN ATHIEST!?!?!?
http://www.angelfire . com/empire/serpentis666/Tree.html SATAN CREATED HUMANITY THROUGH GENETIC ENGINEERING
http://www.angelfire . com/empire/serpentis666/Incubus.html HAVE SEX WITH DEMONS

Don't miss out on this shit, you'll be mad if you do. ANCIENT ALIENS MOTHER FUCKER.

[Anonymous No.4854015]

>>4854007

I don't even ... .

Go away please.

[Anonymous No.4854023]

>>4854004

>I'm sensing you're too uncomfortable exploring this aspect of our Universe and reality itself, though.

Actually no, I've spent much time reflecting on this. It's really my passion of science, to figure out what reality itself really is.

What I'm saying is the idea you're proposing is not different to what science accepts - we don't know yet.

I'm more than willing to discuss this with you if you'd like to present your ideas.

[Anonymous No.4854038]

>>4854023

Good enough.

I guess I should really find that documentary I'm referring to so I can accurately reference their theories.

If space-time is not a succession of events but rather all events occurring at once, that would seem to me to be pretty profound.

(I recognize this is the part where you were questioning why it would matter, but still).

[Anonymous No.4854059]

>>4854038

And I think that's one valid view, but I think it's still all relative. Relative to us on earth, we see time moving at a certain pace. Relative to photons for example, time doesn't work. You could say all events are happening at once or time does not occur at all.

Relative to something able to exist outside the universe, it may see everything as an instantaneous flash or just the opposite where nothing seems to happen at all.

[Anonymous No.4854085]

>>4854059

Right, but I think the authors of the theory were speaking in deeper terms then relativism (an object's speed through space affecting its perception of time--and that object's actions perceived by those traveling a different speed).

I think they were saying time does not exist at all, but is only a construct used by our minds to allow us to function in this physical universe.

That's the part that intrigued me so much, mainly because I believe my own experimentation revealed a similar perspective on reality.

[Anonymous No.4854092]

>>4854085

Yeesh. That first paragraph is a mess. I meant to say the authors weren't referring to time-dilation relative to surrounding objects, but to the absence of time itself.

[Anonymous No.4854103]

>>4854085
most physicist agree with you to some extent, op. This is what physicists are trying to better understand.
Have you looked up anything about the observer effect, schrodinger's cat, etc? It is interesting.
Time not existing might be true to what i call a 'cute' extent, but it is untenable. Yes, time is emergent. the short of it is your argument is a kind of solipsism.

[Anonymous No.4854116]

>>4854085

Certainly a conscious mind is necessary to experience time, so it then makes sense to say it is a construct of the mind. But then how would you explain why or how the physical world would change or even exist without time to allow such things to occur?

You may then say consciousness is what makes the universe exist at all, which really is consistent with our experience as conscious beings, because we only know of time beginning when we become conscious of it.

The problem is explaining how the physical universe got to this point before there were conscious beings without time.

[Anonymous No.4854128]

>>4854085

Anthropic principle?

[Anonymous No.4854137]

>>4854103

I didn't intend it to be a solipsism. And I don't believe it has to be.

Just because all _I_ can fully understand is my own perception of the Universe around me doesn't mean that --

... well, I change my mind. Maybe it is a solipsism.

I accept the perception of how the universe around me interacts with me, and accept that others' perceptions can be revealing and enlighten my own understanding of what I perceive.

How's this: can a man properly analyze the existence of other universes while trapped in their own? (You know what I mean.)

[Anonymous No.4854164]

You should read Kant and stop doing so much acid.

[Anonymous No.4854188]

>>4854164

But I happen to enjoy doing acid.

Any more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw6hS_gy9MY

I'll look up Kant, too.

[Anonymous No.4854197]

dear god they were all getting top quality lsd, needlepoint for sure.