It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

META your mind--reject local realism. The Interface Theory.

page: 1
20

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 08:50 AM
link   

this all might come across as 'word salad', but it is a leading theory of conciousness (in the field). i have prepared a handful of excerpts from the below linked PDF, but on their own they all seem to fall a bit flat. so in this case, i challenge you to pause after reading each statement and try to understand that this theory connects the brain-to-mind in a way never made so explicit...

... the PDF is a fun read (do it)!



a rock is an interface icon, not a constituent of objective reality.

Space, time and separate objects are useful fictions of our interface, not faithful depictions of objective reality.

The contents of our perceptual interfaces don't determine a true theory of the objective world....
.... it (the rock) usefully hides a world that is far more complex.


yet a realist may kick a stone and exclaim "I refute it thus"... in the end, a rock is still a rock. in terms of biology, it is a simple statement of adaptability. [[and politically (ahem. not a political thread.), it eludes to an interesting comparison of the utility of conventional and liberal function.]]


if TRUE perceptions crop up, then natural selection mows them down; nowhere in evolution, even among the most complex of organisms, will you find that natural selection drives truth to fixation.



 

The Case Against Reality, Donald Hoffman (article)
The Interface Theory of Perception (PDF)
 


"The interface theory claims
that perceptual properties and categories
no more resemble the objective world
than Windows icons resemble
the diodes and resistors
of a computer."



have a great sunday, everyone


dkp




posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 09:10 AM
link   
this is my first thread in a good many years and i wouldnt mind a bump or two?



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Oh look, another way to illustrate a simulation, hologram, etc... theory of existence.


This tumbleweed feels the same as all tumbleweeds that tumbled before it.
Perhaps it's not though, and this tumbleweed is a more complex tumbleweed, merely represented by it's similarity to the rest. I'm not a realist, but this makes me a realist in metaphor and idea.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Archivalist

... dont think too hard about it, or....

**poof** (gone)



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Archivalist
What is real (Neo)?
Is it that which can be seen, touched, smelt and sensed?
Or it it the seer, toucher, taster etc?

What if neither the seen or the seer are real?

What if there is just seeing/appearance?

When the two are found to be one (without a second)..... the kingdom is revealed.


edit on 27-10-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: tgidkp

Its all a complex Fourier series of wave-like phenomena in superposition, with varying degrees of entanglement to create the illusion of separation.

That's the universe in one sentence, as I have come to understand it.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Les Brown does some excellent videos explaining light and its integral meanings to us.

First off all rocks are not rocks they are usually mud-fossils.

Second off everything is light in different oppositionally fixed levels of vibration....resonant frequency counter pushes fixate objects which are then representations of the described Windows Icon in relation to the entire animal.

Great thread...excellent questions.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: tgidkp

Its all a complex Fourier series of wave-like phenomena in superposition, with varying degrees of entanglement to create the illusion of separation.

That's the universe in one sentence, as I have come to understand it.


I like it.

I have a grad degree in Applied Physics but I'm still not sure what you're saying.

Can you elaborate a little?

You've provided very little information - especially for those without a baseline knowledge in physics...

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest










a very interesting theory, my friend.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: tgidkp

Its all a complex Fourier series of wave-like phenomena in superposition, with varying degrees of entanglement to create the illusion of separation.

That's the universe in one sentence, as I have come to understand it.


An oversimplification of the Chaos Theory.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

Everything that exists is like a wave in that it has frequency, amplitude/magnitude. It can't be said that everything is made of waves, as quantum objects are more fundamental than waves, but they are definitely wave-like.

Waves can occupy the same space, sort of like stacking papers, only the stack never gets any higher. This is super position. When multiples waves of different frequency are in superposition, they form a Fourier series. This is a product of varying degrees of constructive and destructive interference, which creates an aggregate wave form.

Everything, being wave-like at the fundamental level, is thus in superposition. There is no distance or separation, only varying degrees of entanglement. When particles interact, they become measurably entangled. Everything is already entangled, only its not always obvious to us how. Entanglement only becomes obvious to us via the observation of interaction.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: one4all

No, I didn't mention order or chaos; both of which emerge from randomness. That is a related, but much more complex subject.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: tgidkp

Very nice.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: tgidkp
A rock will always be a rock, and the sky will always be the sky, and the meat puppets will always dance to the strings of causality. Just like fish will always dance to the tune of the ocean around it.

But perceptions are always perceived. Both by people on mass, and by individuals. So what is it, but just a sea of interpretations, sometimes in agreement, and sometimes in disagreement.

But for brevity sake short answers would do, and a bit of moving pictures would do.

Some say music is vibration, like this vid, it says that. But! Maybe everything is vibration, from that rock, to that song, to that video, to that video of a song, merely just interpretations.


I'm becoming less defined as days go by, well you might say, I'm losing focus.



posted on Oct, 27 2019 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: tgidkp

I find computer metaphors for the human mind to be too discrete.

I'm still hung up on the idea our consciousness is an analog radio receiver and the signal is coming from the very deepest level or fabric of reality:



This one is going to take me a while to unravel.



posted on Oct, 28 2019 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: tgidkp

I get the sense this thread was inspired by the Interface series on YouTube but if not you'd probably find it interesting. I haven't taken the time to really dive deeply into the meaning behind it, but I get the impression it's conveying a theory similar to what you present here. The fuzzy stuff that seems to be the "soul" is working through "interfaces", hence the name of the series, or something like that lol.




posted on Oct, 28 2019 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest




Everything, being wave-like at the fundamental level, is thus in superposition. There is no distance or separation, only varying degrees of entanglement. When particles interact, they become measurably entangled. Everything is already entangled, only its not always obvious to us how. Entanglement only becomes obvious to us via the observation of interaction.


Thanks for taking the time to help me understand.

I understand entanglement. So are you you're saying that it's only obvious when there is an "observer" present?

Where I have heard this before?

Oh yes! The Observer effect re: double slit experiments with light photons.

But is Schrodinger's cat dead or alive?

And what about entanglement on a cosmic scale - vast distances? If you're in for a penny, you're in for a pound as they say. Entanglement is not distance sensitive, n'est pas?

This stuff makes my brain melt a little...




edit on 10/28/2019 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

I think everything is interwoven via entanglement. That's why entropy is a probabilistic process. From the macro scale, it seems deterministic, but at the micro scale, there is more randomness. Nevertheless, regardless of the observer's presence, I do believe that the obvious states of entanglement are the ones that make up our reality. The infinite categories of hidden entangled states probably make up the multiverse; that which could be, but has not yet been called into decoherence.

And to clarify, I do believe in the observer effect, but I also believe interacting particles can qualify as observers. Basically, I think the universe exists as a Von Neumann chain of observations. The question is, who or what is at the end of the chain?




top topics



 
20

log in

join