DEEP THOUGHTS

quirkytizzy

I've always like the thought that while the brain is real, the MIND is a metaphor.

The mind, or a collection of thoughts, life experiences, moods, etc, all built on itself within a lifetime, doesn't have a physical body. It isn't tangible. Our minds are purely and solely what we THINK, which is ephemeral. Physical things can affect it, but what it is ITSELF is not able to be pinpointed.

It cannot be quantified.

BUT, we can "lose" our minds. How does one lose something that is intangible?

THIS IS WHY I LOSE FRIENDS.

LOL! This is a good question. I'd like to say I have an answer, but I don't. Maybe the physical affects the intangible in such a way that it is unavoidable???

Cp731

Assuming that life has no inherent meaning or purpose, and that all meaning and purpose assigned to life is subjectively based, is not everything in life objectively meaningless and without purpose? What is the point of continuing to live, assuming that there is no continuation of our consciousness beyond its current state, and no inherent objective to accomplish within our lives.

Is the point to simply live without any defined meaning or purpose, and if so, why such a drive within the species to create subjective definitions to fill both voids with temporary and irrelevant values. Is it a necessity within our species to have meaning and purpose in our lives as a component of our means to survival?

Is the point to live life in service to a higher power? By this, a higher power could be anything from a worthy and charitable cause, to the subjective existence of any one of the thousands of fictional and made up gods humanity has created throughout its existence. Again, considering the objective fate of both humanity, the earth, and the universe itself, what does this matter but within a subjective standpoint.

Is the point to life to live within a moral code, upholding the fabric of the civilizations which our ancestors made so many sacrifices to create and maintain. Considering that morality, and the concepts of right and wrong are within themselves subjective creations subject to the diverse regions of the world in which they are created and applied, what is the point of upholding any moral code but that of one's personal obligation to oneself?

Life has no purpose (as far as I can tell) except to generate more life. We come from a very very long line of winners: every single one of our ancestors, right back to the first self-replicating molecules 4 billion years ago or so, have managed to leave progeny behind. The drive to live and to procreate is very strong in every living thing today because it's what we all evolved to do.

Other than that, it is up to us to make sense of our lives, and to find our own purpose.

"Why are we here?" is the wrong question. We are here, so we should be asking "what do I do now?"

So, you aren’t sure what to do next. You want to make a decision.

If you are reading this post, it probably means that you have some spare time and can afford thinking about what you want to do. But let’s assume for now that you don’t have lots of time to think about a good decision. So, what are viable options for making quick decisions?
1.Habit: If you have been in a similar situation before, you can simply do the same thing that you have done the last time in that similar situation.
2.Randomness: List your options and chose one at random. If you don’t have more than 6 options, you can assign a number from 1 to 6 to every option you have and throw a die. In the case of only 2 options, you can throw a coin.
3.Advice: You ask some other person what to do. Often authorities (for example parents, bosses, teachers, advisors, officers or religious leaders) will act pre-emptively and tell you what to do beforehand, so you don’t even have to ask them.
4.Introspection: Look deep inside yourself and determine what you want to do the most at the moment.
5.Imitation: Imitate the behavior of someone else.

These approaches work quickly, but sometimes their results are questionable. If you really want or need to decide quickly, go for it. Here are some points that might help you to weigh the pros and cons of your method of choice:
1.First of all, we do almost everything we do out of habit. You don’t have to make a lot decisions to walk
2.Deciding randomly is a pretty legitimate approach, if the options you consider worthwhile are nearly equally good in their outcome.
3.Doing something what some other person tells you to do shifts the problem from making a decision yourself to deciding which person is most trustworthy in the matter of question. In that sense, this approach is no real solution to the general problem of how to decide.
4.Following your strongest inner desires is a really great idea – except you pursue a very hard goal or just want to stay out of trouble. Reaching difficult goals usually requires some amount of self-discipline, which means not doing what you feel like doing at the moment. On the other hand, you simply cannot unfold your full potential if you do not follow your core desires.
5.Imitating others saves your mental resources, because you don’t have to think for yourself

•Otherwise just follow your intuition / gut instincts.

twelfty

why do some women have a box gap and some don't......

richardheath

what can go up a chimney down but can't go down a chimney up?

An umbrella.

UsedToBeHusky

But was there really a beginning to the Universe? The Big Bang is simply as far back in time as we can go - we don't know what there was before that. Maybe there is a cycle of Big Bangs followed by Big Crunches and then another Big Bang, ad infinituum?

It actually follows that there was something before our Big Bang. The Big Bang happened as a result of matter condensing and getting more and more dense until it exploded outward. Therefore, that matter that was pressed down DID exist in some form or another previously.

Since you are all serious in this thread, are you familiar with the theories that at the heart of all galaxies is a supermassive black hole that is compressing matter that will inevitably be pushed through a wormhole to another point in space and give birth to a whole new galaxy? I find those theories very interesting and highly plausible.

chocl8girl

Dryer lint is the cremated remains of the socks the dryer eats.

quirkytizzy

Since you are all serious in this thread, are you familiar with the theories that at the heart of all galaxies is a supermassive black hole that is compressing matter that will inevitably be pushed through a wormhole to another point in space and give birth to a whole new galaxy? I find those theories very interesting and highly plausible.

While wormholes are still theoretical at this point, you are absolutely correct that within galaxies there are black holes. The Milky Way has one, too. It is extremely likely, what with galaxies colliding (as the Milky Way will with its neighboring galaxy) and creating even bigger black holes, that we could see another "Big Bang" eventually.

twelfty

Since you are all serious in this thread, are you familiar with the theories that at the heart of all galaxies is a supermassive black hole that is compressing matter that will inevitably be pushed through a wormhole to another point in space and give birth to a whole new galaxy? I find those theories very interesting and highly plausible.

While wormholes are still theoretical at this point, you are absolutely correct that within galaxies there are black holes. The Milky Way has one, too. It is extremely likely, what with galaxies colliding (as the Milky Way will with its neighboring galaxy) and creating even bigger black holes, that we could see another "Big Bang" eventually.

you wouldn't see it because the big bang happens the otherside of the black hole

bigphatcat

What if C-A-T really spelled dog?

quirkytizzy

you wouldn't see it because the big bang happens the otherside of the black hole

Nope, we wouldn't. Assuming humanity manages to hold out for the billions upon billions of years this would take, it would be a hell of a thing to see. SOMEONE INVENT TIME TRAVEL NOW DAMMNIT!

neandermagnon

what about Shroedinger's cat? Is it dead or alive or suspended between the two until anyone goes to check? Should Shroedinger be prosecuted for animal cruelty? Or would the cat itself be considered as capable of observing whether it's dead or alive and thus render the whole thought experiment redundant? (or at the very least observing that it's still alive, not sure that anything can observe that it's dead............... which adds an assymmetrical level of uncertainty to the experiment....)

UsedToBeHusky

Since you are all serious in this thread, are you familiar with the theories that at the heart of all galaxies is a supermassive black hole that is compressing matter that will inevitably be pushed through a wormhole to another point in space and give birth to a whole new galaxy? I find those theories very interesting and highly plausible.

While wormholes are still theoretical at this point, you are absolutely correct that within galaxies there are black holes. The Milky Way has one, too. It is extremely likely, what with galaxies colliding (as the Milky Way will with its neighboring galaxy) and creating even bigger black holes, that we could see another "Big Bang" eventually.

you wouldn't see it because the big bang happens the otherside of the black hole

He's got a point... but I'm pretty sure none of us will see it anyway.

I've never actually heard it officially mentioned in the theory, but it stands to reason that if the biological materials required for life are present in the Milky Way, then they also could exist on the other side of Sag A, and then, at least for this galaxy, and its subsequent regeneration, that life will always exist.

Jus' sayin'.

quirkytizzy

what about Shroedinger's cat? Is it dead or alive or suspended between the two until anyone goes to check? Should Shroedinger be prosecuted for animal cruelty? Or would the cat itself be considered as capable of observing whether it's dead or alive and thus render the whole thought experiment redundant? (or at the very least observing that it's still alive, not sure that anything can observe that it's dead............... which adds an assymmetrical level of uncertainty to the experiment....)

That was the whole point of the Schroedinger's experiment. That no experiment proves anything until it is observed and the observation changes the experiment. I think he developed the idea as a sort of joke, but it turned out to be a very good explanation of one of the flaws in scientific theory.

Also, I want a cat that's capable of observing its own mortality or lack thereof. Most awesome. cat. ever!

I've never actually heard it officially mentioned in the theory, but it stands to reason that if the biological materials required for life are present in the Milky Way, then they also could exist on the other side of Sag A, and then, at least for this galaxy, and its subsequent regeneration, that life will always exist.

Jus' sayin'.

That's a very exciting thought!

UsedToBeHusky

Since you are all serious in this thread, are you familiar with the theories that at the heart of all galaxies is a supermassive black hole that is compressing matter that will inevitably be pushed through a wormhole to another point in space and give birth to a whole new galaxy? I find those theories very interesting and highly plausible.

While wormholes are still theoretical at this point, you are absolutely correct that within galaxies there are black holes. The Milky Way has one, too. It is extremely likely, what with galaxies colliding (as the Milky Way will with its neighboring galaxy) and creating even bigger black holes, that we could see another "Big Bang" eventually.

you wouldn't see it because the big bang happens the otherside of the black hole

He's got a point... but I'm pretty sure none of us will see it anyway.

I've never actually heard it officially mentioned in the theory, but it stands to reason that if the biological materials required for life are present in the Milky Way, then they also could exist on the other side of Sag A, and then, at least for this galaxy, and its subsequent regeneration, that life will always exist.

Jus' sayin'.

But if the universe is just comprised of a series of galaxies that are perpetually feeding upon and recycling themselves, then when and where was the true beginning?

Or is it just a perpetual cycle much in the way everything else in the universe works, what with its revolutions and rotations?

I'm pretty sure this was something along the lines of what Einstein was trying to get at with his unified theory of everything. But instead of strings... it's actually loops, or circles, or spheres.

quirkytizzy

But if the universe is just comprised of a series of galaxies that are perpetually feeding upon and recycling themselves, then when and where was the true beginning?

Or is it just a perpetual cycle much in the way everything else in the universe works, what with its revolutions and rotations?

I'm pretty sure this was something along the lines of what Einstein was trying to get at with his unified theory of everything. But instead of strings... it's actually loops.

This is also a proposed universal theory - and a good one, at that. Much more observable than String Theory. I like how you put it - loops. Good and visual analogy.

Hirgy03

Wouldn't the color brown be better for toilet brushes than white or light blue? Seems obvious, no?

UsedToBeHusky

But if the universe is just comprised of a series of galaxies that are perpetually feeding upon and recycling themselves, then when and where was the true beginning?

Or is it just a perpetual cycle much in the way everything else in the universe works, what with its revolutions and rotations?

I'm pretty sure this was something along the lines of what Einstein was trying to get at with his unified theory of everything. But instead of strings... it's actually loops.

This is also a proposed universal theory - and a good one, at that. Much more observable than String Theory. I like how you put it - loops. Good and visual analogy.

Yeah... I think about this kind of stuff often. I thought I was the first one to realize the 'rebirth' theory until I did some research on the internet and found out some physicist in Australia beat me to it.

quirkytizzy

Yeah... I think about this kind of stuff often. I thought I was the first one to realize the 'rebirth' theory until I did some research on the internet and found out some physicist in Australia beat me to it.

Curse those Australians!

bullofheaven

"Today, a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration – that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There's no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. ." - Bill Hicks

To answer the question, what am I?

I am the alpha and the omega. The First and The Last, The Origin and The Fulfillment. I occupy all space and all time. And I am the one, and the only. Through the infinite one, I and I manifested dis meat bag to experience this particular fractional splice of this fractal dimension. To learn to love. To love, to be love and loved.
Jah is love. JAH RASTAFARI. Forever loving all.

Blown_Away1

Very interesting post...grabbing coffee to lurk dont mind me :happy: