Truth is a reality checking process in the mind. It can operate in a healthy fashion, or get twisted, or can just be totally eschewed for a strictly relativistic artifice that excuses any stance as just what’s in fad of the mental moment.
In a holograph does time exist? No. Only in linear analysis of a hologram can time exist.
So reality is a hologram? Yes. One section of a broader base image arising on and emerging from a pre-existing infrastructure.
I heard one theory that time is a hologram of the final universe projected backwards so that it gets less refined as you get towards the beginning. Yes, the omega point, one node of many.
That sounds like old age. Actually, the omega point would be the end of aging, the end of information decay in any form. Everything having evolved to its utmost complexity, having achieved its utmost stability, but it’s still all about configuration in the end. It’s all about why. In this theory, there is no need for a big bang, because at the certain distance, the hologram is no longer visible.
What is singularity or zero point? A singularity is an object or event having reached infinite mass, which in a sense is achieving infinite reality. String theory is two dimensional, just watching the glass crack without mapping the chain of energy that is connected to its cracking, or understanding the physics that could allow for the cracked glass.
If we go into a singularity what will happen to us? We will be torn apart by tidal forces? Dispersion is overrated. There are multiple poles to the structures people refer to as singularities. This is why cosmic strings haven’t just sliced reality to ribbons even though they are mobile.
Have you enjoyed this discussion so far? I would like to get an idea about what scientific topics you might be interested in as far as metaphysics goes, any preferences?
Seeing into the future, psychics. Well, I mean to confine this class to science, but I can discuss predictive algorithms and how they may emerge in human consciousness?
Can “preference” be explored “scientifically”? Preference can be discussed from the point of view of a metaphysics of science, yes.
I am fascinated by a phenomenon that seems to occur sometimes in scientific investigations. I have an idea, a particular focus, in mind, and after a while there is a shift and I realize that I am part of that focus. Example: I look at the Milky Way, study it, ponder it, and then there comes this great shift. I am aware that I am PART of that I previously had been focusing on. Could that “Shift” be explored scientifically? Yes.
The state of a particle is determined by both its past and its future, such that changes to it in the future will affect it in the present.
I thought I might discuss human neurological bias and how it’s created a physical interface for the behaviours involved and what impact that may have on pre-existing reality, perceptual and cognitive illusions and how they manifest in algorithms we use to compute and make projections. We think we think of these things, but these are not invented things. They are how we already thought.
So a good start. Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.