Theory Of Everything.

Discussion in 'Science and Nature' started by Timesplasher, Apr 11, 2014.

  1. #1 Timesplasher, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 15, 2014
    Aliens.jpg

     
  2. #2 MelT, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 11, 2014
     
    I got to 12 minutes and got bored, I'll go back to it later. It's not a theory of everything so far...
     
    MelT
     
    Bit further in now. He's making up his own criteria, linking everything to his own view on what consciousness is. Real science that we already know mixed in with complete guesswork with nothing to substantiate it. A ToE requires math.
     
    I'm slightly disappointed, I thought it would be better, but I'l keep going. Still no framework of a ToE, just a lot of 'hey, this is spooky! We don't know everything about our world', which is kind of same old to be honest.
     
  3. #3 Timesplasher, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 11, 2014
    Thats was why i posted the link. I take no ownership of it but by comparison to totaly unrealed info out there it it is interesting. There some personal valid connnections. Again its frustrating that other people try and define s meaning to life thats non of there buisness to present as factual. Im not looking for meaningful answers or taking interest in any human theory that requires a belief. I did watch a interesting clip on quatum entaglement and as per usual it gets into human teleportation.
     
  4. Im interested in any other similiar links if possible. In particular something relevant to the relationship between quatum theory and human reality.
     
  5. #5 MelT, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 11, 2014
     
     I meant in the script. Take the section that starts around 9 minutes on what the loss or partial loss of the right lobe does to perception. It's used as an example of strangeness. It is simply one of many accepted effects that losing that part of the brain has, it has no implications on reality, any more than the fact that our brains have to invert the image that enters our eyes, it's just as it is.
     
    I got to half way through and so far nothng has been said of any concrete nature that either isn't already known or contributes to a ToE. I'll persevere.
     
    You support it to some extent? Could you tell me whihc aspects of it you found interesting?
     
    MelT
     
  6.  
    Could you explain what you mean by 'human reality'?
     
    MelT
     
  7. Empirical science will never reach the "inside" of reality with their formula's and equation's -- which are plagued by the constant disturbance of the induction fallacy. The "theory of everything" already exists, and is very real; the philosopher, i.e., any genuine inquirer, just needs to find out how to put the pieces together when truly ruminating over the vast concatenation of ideas, i.e., the manifestations of philosophy.
     
    What science can never "confirm" is what philosophy and religious people understand -- and that is, we are all One. Science will never reach this sole objective fact of the UNIverse, precisely because Man can never "see" past his phenomenal spectacles.

    And I use phenomenal in the Kantian sense of the word.

    Kantianism:
    a. an appearance or immediate object of awareness in experience.

    b. a thing as it appears to and is constructed by the mind.
     
    P.S.
    The theory of everything for the Western World must begin with Descartes' axiom!
     
    \t“Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”
     
  8. #8 Boats And Hoes, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 11, 2014
    ... notice that that quote above was stated by one of the founding fathers of quantum theory...
     
  9.  
    You shouldn't say never though.... everything seems impossible until it happens.
     
  10.  
    Can a person ever experience the totality of existence empirically...? You cannot experience all of actuality at one time... you can only envisage its essence by utilizing the intellect, i.e., only mentally can we conceive of the answer to "everything".
     
  11.  
    At one time? what exactly is one time?
     
  12.  
    lol Really? Let's broaden the question then, so as to thwart skepticism... can you travel and experience "all" of space-time in ONE life-span?
     
  13.  
    "What science can never "confirm" is what philosophy and religious people understand -- and that is, we are all One. Science will never reach this sole objective fact of the UNIverse,"
     
    I'm experiencing it right now, according to your quote.
     
    Lol I know what you're saying, sorry.
     
  14.  
    Ah, but, as Kant would say, noumenally and not phenomenally; that is to say, you experience it intuively.
     
  15. #15 Timesplasher, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 11, 2014
    Thanks for the input so far. This is the first i have ever looked for understanding of what contributes to my perception of myself existing and interpreting the world around me. Normaly i would of just said interprutes and wouldnt consider any altertanitive. Im happy with my already existing sence of self and my perception of the world. So in the end of got nothing to lose. The first mistake i could make would be to try defend someome elses interpretion because i dont its not my interpretation and all i would let myself take on board would be the factual components that are evidence based. This is what i was hoping to get via feedback in this thread.
     
  16. #16 Timesplasher, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 11, 2014
    Melt rather tham double up posting my thoughts of what a human reality means to be subjectively is on the thread that lead me into this one. Im not gonnna change the way i communicate ideas so although im likely wrong in my interpretation my resposes stil have the same arrogant tone:) mobile posting is not helping the cause either.
     
  17.  
    No problem T, I understand, no arrogant tone detected TBH. I just need to know the meaning of your terminology.
     
    MelT
     
  18.  
    Id like to know as well:)
     

Share This Page