blog
blog
Out of context: Reply #76415
- Started
- Last post
- 76,753 Responses
- NBQ00-3
What is the universe and why does it exist?
- Why is a silly question.monospaced
- My teacher once said: there are no silly questions, only silly answers.NBQ00
- only assholes without answers.********
- @monospaced this is what u would you say to your kid if he asks this q?********
- why is the universe?pango
- You really don't know what the universe is?palimpsest
- Our are you not capable of comprehending the concept of universe?palimpsest
- pali, enlighten me please. What exactly is the universe and why does it exist?NBQ00
- The universe is the space we occupy, make that of it what you will. It's only limited by your understanding.palimpsest
- As per Wikipedia: "The universe is all of space and time and their contents."palimpsest
- Is you don't know what the universe is your shouldn't be asking why it is.palimpsest
- Did you really think I was looking for a standard basic answer like "space and time and their contents"?NBQ00
- Once you understand it, in your own way, why becomes self-evident or unnecessary.palimpsest
- And I agree, this is a silly question.palimpsest
- "looking for a standard basic answer"
You might think you're being deep, but you're just being stupid.palimpsest - you guys must be shitty parents.********
- The worst. How many do you have?palimpsest
- This is why this even more infuriating because both my 8 & 15 year old have a solid knowledge of the universe and I can have relevant discussions with them of.palimpsest
- My children are smart enough to not dismiss my answer to their question but build upon it.palimpsest
- ok dadNBQ00
- No sweat, buddy.palimpsest
- But good ahead, learn me somin'!
I'm giddy.palimpsest - Considering there is no actual answer to “why” it exists, I would say that the why is what we make of it personally. Any other answer cannot be genuine.monospaced
- I wouldn’t resort to myth or supernatural beings to answer the “why question. That would be bad parenting in my opinion.monospaced
- Why would one even attempt to understand why something is if they can't even understand what it is?palimpsest
- And when you provide the what they're like : "that's too standard".
So you tell me, buddy.palimpsest - the universe is the place that doesn't abide foreskinsGnash
- You’re talking about the Lacanian universe, the symbolic order, the grid that decides what can appear and what gets cut off.palimpsest
- You’re describing the map, I’m describing the terrain.palimpsest
- Both are models trying to describe what can’t be stepped outside of, so both are flawed.palimpsest
- But that’s the interesting part — not the “what” or the “why,” just how we keep mistaking one level for the other.palimpsest
- 3.566×1080 m
1.5×1053 kg
13.787±0.020 billion years[neverscared - the universe is a canvas for consciousness to evolveneverscared
- u can think thats why its there.neverscared
- What about rocks?palimpsest
- the universe is parametricised thats where u have your can find your what answers .. starting from the max planck constant.neverscared
- where u can find your -what answers-neverscared
- Teleology is narrative error.palimpsest
- It's still a stupid question.palimpsest
- Consciousness is a property of the universe, sure. But so is defecation.
It’s a deep property, not an inherent one.palimpsest - rocks have parameters too.... if u see the universe nonlnear its inherent..neverscared
- My rocks question was about the "canvas for consciouness"palimpsest
- But, is your “canvas” a separate layer, or part of the same fabric or more as a metaphor for the whole thing, consciousness included?palimpsest
- I’m trying to see if you see it as two levels or one continuous field.palimpsest
- We can probably agree that consciousness isn’t outside the system. The question is whether it’s descriptive or generativepalimpsest
- I’m fine with consciousness as an emergent property, not a goal. We can study its patterns without calling them intentions.palimpsest
- its a n-dimensions space in theory and in physics as far dimensions as the metric goesneverscared
- It's still a stupid question.palimpsest
- OK,chief. It’s n-dimensional, metric, curved, whatever the model needs.
That doesn’t make it purposeful, just complex. Adding dimensions doesn’t add intent.palimpsest - It's a nice metric flex, but we’re not lost in spacetime here.palimpsest
- sorry .. iam argumenting to absolute here...dont take i too serious iam only freejazzing f.. the stone thing... its maybe entangled in entropy and thermodynamicneverscared
- s... i mean for sure entangled there with the universe... thats to puny for consc. but effective still..neverscared
- isnt complexity and purpose in a way interconncected .. in biology from uni-to multi cell to a brain blasting in high neuron activity numbers...neverscared
- i guess when they finished studying the neutrino we will finaly know and the stoopid question is answered.... or not.. probbaly not...neverscared
- Let’s be clear:
I’m saying the universe is everything that exists. Consciousness arises inside. Remarkable yes, but not its purpose.palimpsest - You’ve called it a “canvas for consciousness,” then said rocks have parameters, then invoked n-dimensional metrics.palimpsest
- That isn’t an argument, it’s a collage. Adding physics buzzwords doesn’t turn teleology into science.palimpsest
- If you think consciousness is inherent, just say it. But don’t pretend “non-linear” or “n-dimensional” makes it so.palimpsest
- It's still a stupid question.palimpsest
- How matter gives rise to consciousness is still not understood. That’s an interesting question.mort_
- There are those that theorise that consciousness is fundamental and not an emergent aspect of matter.mort_
- i said in theory its n dimensions.... i think its nonlinear and not pretend otherwise einsteins general relativity makes no sense if not... therefore evidentlyneverscared
- It's not about emergence (from the matter) but embeddedness.
Consciousness doesn’t rise from matter; it rises from our being within matter...palimpsest - ...from the need to make sense of what we are and what surrounds us.palimpsest
- inherent. ok iam fine with collage.. ... a collage is as in an assemblage of arguments.neverscared
- A non-mystical Spinozian monism.palimpsest
- @neverscared
OK, chief.palimpsest - my pleasure.neverscared
- don't throwin' shade at SpinozaGnash
- spinoza is all nice and good. but considering that he didnt even know that anti-matter exists makes this quote where it belongs in the 17th century...neverscared
- @Gnash
with the real issues!palimpsest - einstein believed in spinnie's godGnash
- https://i.haasie.com…palimpsest
- " So now you don’t know what the hell to do, do ya?"
Normpalimpsest - And what have we learned lads and gents?
That unless you have a pea for a brain, definining and understanding the universe is not that hard.palimpsest - @neverscared
My man, rest assured that I will lay my head on my pillow tonight without having understood a word you've said & my only wish is you do the same.palimpsest - not really.. einstein view in cosmic religion that in cosmic laws god reveals himself as in spinoza god is cheesy to me too.. maybe ok for its time.. butneverscared
- nowadays all the god blalaba seems hillarousy esoteric .. no one talking that eso stuff anymore except some not up to date blokes.neverscared
- imagine some top scientists start brabeling that god harmony stuff rhetoric today shining fru... thats outdated..neverscared
- yes u didnt understand a word... thats the problem... a semantic problem... instead of a unambitious wish ...better try to learn what the various wordsneverscared
- mean and then read the sentences again and u get it.... thats how it works dummy.neverscared
- We’re in different games. I’m defining the universe; you’re defending a vibe.
No hard feelings, just not the same register. I’m out.palimpsest - Spinozas god isn’t really an argument for any meaningful entity.monospaced
- the universe is a vibe... as quantum physics tells as everything is a wave... dude u dont even understand the fundamentals.neverscared
- particle and wave at the same moment.neverscared
- @pali we are matter, not within matter!mort_