Science tells us that an objective physical universe doesn't exist

a reply to: neoholographic

Well, as far as i can establish, Nathan Drake does not know anything about our universe and labors under the illusion, the Uncharted verse is the extent of his 3rd dimension.

Might not be that much different from our perspective should the universe/reality turn out to harbor intrinsic holographic properties.

Mabey Shakespeare had it right and the world is simply a stage where every man must play a part?

Maybe everything is connected via "dark matter" or what we can only process as emptiness throughout the universe. And everything within this space and time that is and also isn't experienced is all constantly being rendered a nanosecond before thought processes it into existence (think schrodinger's cat) by mankind's collective consciousness (we are one... as the neo-post modern new age hippy enthusiastically talks about while stoned like Jimi Hendrix).

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: neoholographic

That is not at all proven.

Don't let facts get in the way of wild speculation!

Turtles.
All the way down.

originally posted by: black1334shores
Maybe everything is connected via "dark matter" or what we can only process as emptiness throughout the universe. And everything within this space and time that is and also isn't experienced is all constantly being rendered a nanosecond before thought processes it into existence (think schrodinger's cat) by mankind's collective consciousness (we are one... as the neo-post modern new age hippy enthusiastically talks about while stoned like Jimi Hendrix).

Dark matter is another thing that is not proven to exist. It is just a placeholder to explain the reason why the math for calculating the amount of matter in the universe doesn’t add up to what was predicted.

a reply to: Woodcarver

Wow. Just wow.

Now you know better than Stephen Hawking too?

What kind of "scientist" are you if you don't mind me being super curious which section of them knows everything?

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: black1334shores
Maybe everything is connected via "dark matter" or what we can only process as emptiness throughout the universe. And everything within this space and time that is and also isn't experienced is all constantly being rendered a nanosecond before thought processes it into existence (think schrodinger's cat) by mankind's collective consciousness (we are one... as the neo-post modern new age hippy enthusiastically talks about while stoned like Jimi Hendrix).

Dark matter is another thing that is not proven to exist. It is just a placeholder to explain the reason why the math for calculating the amount of matter in the universe doesn’t add up to what was predicted.

You might be thinking of Dark Energy, which despite both names including the word "dark" seem not to be associated with each other. Dark Energy may not exist, but may actually be solved through a greater understanding of already-known forces. Or maybe the information you have about dark matter research is a bit out of date; it has in the past (as recently as a decade ago) been argued that dark matter may not exist and might be explained by tweaking our understanding of the effects of gravity.

However, Dark Matter does seem to be stuff that does in fact exist, and not just -- for example -- a function of a misunderstanding of gravity. Dark Matter, whatever it is, does show itself through the gravitational interactions with normal baryonic matter, such as the gravitational lensing effect, even though dark matter itself does not seem to interact with electromagnetic radiation -- i.e., the tools we use to "see" things usually use EM radiation to do the seeing, and there is nothing to see on the EM spectrum with dark matter.

The way we know that dark matter most likely exists (and knowing it most likely exists is one of the few things we know about dark matter) and is not just a fundamental misunderstanding of gravity is that we have observed the gravitational effects of dark matter, such as the gravitational lensing effect mentioned above, and more importantly have found galaxies that seem to absent of dark matter -- an absence that is deduced by watching the action of normal matter in those galaxies.

A further explanation of this...In the 1960s and 1970s, the famous astronomer Vera Rubin noticed that galaxies rotate in such a way that something (dark matter) must be present whose gravity is holding the galaxy together. Some argued in the past that perhaps there really isn't something invisible whose gravity is holding it all together, but maybe if we re-adajusted our understanding of gravity, it would show that the galaxy could be held together without inventing this invisble dark matter. HOWEVER, the fact that in recent years there have been galaxaies discovered that do NOT exhibit this same kind of "held-together" motion means that we understnd the effects of gravity well enough, but those other galaxies seem to just be missing dark matter.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Woodcarver

Wow. Just wow.

Now you know better than Stephen Hawking too?

What kind of "scientist" are you if you don't mind me being super curious which section of them knows everything?

I am an engineer, materials analyst. And dark matter is not a proven thing. Even stephen hawkings agrees that it is just a place holder for an effect that we do not entirely understand.

a reply to: GetHyped

When people bring up simulation theory I can't help but think about Rodin Vector Based Mathematics, which devolved into 300 pages of people more and desperately screeching yes but WHAT DOES IT DO!!!

I could be really off base on this one and at some point someone at D wave will hold a press conference about locating a zero day exploit in the universe and explain how we can all open our cheats menu now and even choose respawn points...

But I kinda doubt it?

a reply to: yeahright

Down all the way turtles

We witness this universe with our physical senses. With that input resolved by our brains. Our brains and senses are not infallible to mistakes so we cannot be 100% certain of anything. But without contradictory evidence we must presume that what we see, hear, touch and taste is what exists.

The Hindu's have a concept of Maya, that everything is an illusion. But that has more to do with our mental outlook. That we wrongly believe that we are separate entities from the whole. Whereas Hinduism teaches Tat Tvam Asi (thou art that - the whole). So the hindu's search within (meditation on the emptiness of atman or soul) to witness the cosmic Brahman (the whole).

So without contradictory evidence. There is no point believing we live within a programmed matrix. The creation is indeed magnificent. As are we (Tat Tvam Asi).

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Woodcarver

Wow. Just wow.

Now you know better than Stephen Hawking too?

What kind of "scientist" are you if you don't mind me being super curious which section of them knows everything?

I am an engineer, materials analyst. And dark matter is not a proven thing. Even stephen hawkings agrees that it is just a place holder for an effect that we do not entirely understand.

It was Stephen Hawking, at least in this universe. He was not a plurality.

Sadly, though, he passed away on the 14th of March, this year.

I also doubt that Hawking would describe dark matter (and energy) as 'place holders'. While there are a few things we don't know about them, there is also what we do know, can measure and can infer.

You don't have to see air to feel the wind.

Our universe may not exist, but I'll bet other universes DO exist, and I sure hope they'll like us 'illegal aliens'!

a reply to: glend

But if we are all just part of the whole, why are we here? If the whole or oneness is that great, why did we separate ourselves into these multiple personalities?

If the whole was preferable to the separate individual, we would still be whole, no?

That we are all one person scares the living &#(*& out of me.

A lot of eastern religions are trying to get back to the one, the whole and even reject this physical world with all of its pleasures. Why even be here in the first place? To learn a lesson? Again if the whole was the all to be all, why are we here?

a reply to: ClovenSky

why are we here?

We can only guess. Some religions tell us that there is no notion of time in the spiritual. We already exist in the perfect enlightened state. But exist within a dream to weaken the Creator’s desires. By experiencing all dualities that exist.

That we are all one person scares the living &#(*& out of me.

There appears two parts to our self. The atman (or soul) and our brain. Most of us consider the brain as our true self. But in reality its merely a logic circuit that learns and responds from a lifetime of experience. When we meditate we can bypass our brain to experience a deeper self. It is what I have nick named the watcher. It seems to have basic feelings but is empty of judgement or desires. Our true self is not scared.

Once we realise the emptiness of the atman we can be one with the Brahman (or in Christianity - No one knows the Father except the Son). Allowing us to witness all that every single entity has ever experienced. So why fear the loss of singularity when the sum of all, is greater?

One of his students asked Buddha, “Are you the messiah?”
“No”, answered Buddha.
“Then are you a healer?”
“No”, Buddha replied.
“Then are you a teacher?” the student persisted.
“No, I am not a teacher.”
“Then what are you?” asked the student, exasperated.
“I am awake”, Buddha replied