zambize

I'm aware there are detectors that don't use light, that was just one example of a possible detector. Others could use magnetic/electric fields, could be a photomultiplier etc..... I haven't ruled out quantum mechanics, I just at this point am not interested in trying to explain reality via QM, maybe in the future I will. I don't really care about materialists, I don't agree with them, and I really don't care what they think. The people with at work, we don't really talk about QM and the nature of reality, nor do college classes. They teach the probability side of it, the matrix math you need etc. In my work, we talk about specific designs of circuits and what not, I don't know I think you have this weird view of brain washing scientists. It's just a bunch of dumb fucks in grad school trying to get a paper out and graduate, no ones talking about god,consciousness, materials etc. We talk about how it's a bitch when certain wires need to be replaced and how much they hate their jobs. Just so you don't have this notion that I'm in any way a materialist, or that we're a materialist cult in colleges haha

No I think me saying light will effect the outcome of a particle it hits is no more materialist than saying a hammer will effect your head if you hit yourself in the head with it. I would say it does matter where I work in the sense that I had to get an education in QM and am frequently exposed to the literature. And even if I'm wrong, it doesn't mean my materialistic cult colleagues are trying to brain wash me. They may have limitations on their view of reality if they believe that QM and measurements in the lab are the only way of answering deep questions of the universe, but that's to each individual to decide. Most of them are just working a job in a topic they found semi-interesting, not really much more complicated than that. But yeah I'll leave the QM for you to decide for yourself, it wouldn't really matter to me if I was wrong or right because my questions aren't going to be answered with quantum mechanics

I work in a quantum computing lab, I'm not going to argue quantum mechanics with copy and pasted mainstream articles

No it's pretty certain that it is the light, if you can clearly see that the particle went through one of the slits, it definitely didn't go through the other. How do scientists know it went through one of the slits? They shine a light at the entrance of the slits to see if it went through, if it did, it won't act strangely, it will just act like the particle went through the slit that the light showed it go through. Quantum entanglement does not communicate information, that's against the laws of physics. While it's true that a system that is entangled seems to communicate a measurement on one end of the entanglement to the other instantaneously, it's not the same thing as "communicating", it's much more technical and has its limitations. It's not materialistic to believe that the perceptual universe effects the perceptual universe, I would argue it's more materialistic to use a topic of dead matter that you don't fully understand to prove concepts that unless you understand from direct experience, you don't really understand

Are you trying to argue that shining light onto a particle that's in a superposition of going through two slits will not collapse the wave function? What specific claim are you arguing?

So observation in this sense doesn't necessarily mean consciousness, it might just be shining a light on one of the particles. In QM, there are many types of measurements that will collapse the wave function, but that's being too technical. While I agree QM does point to there being something really strange and kind of meta-physical, I would not use these QM results to try and prove the conclusions you've come to, I would use direct experience

Yeah I partially agree with you, I broke up with my ex because she did a lot of small stuff like texting goodmorning but I really feel like it was her being insecure looking for me to say something back for her own emotional needs. Maybe this is the case here, she probably needs more space or wants to break up with you. I tried to create distance in hopes that she would let me message back when I was ready instead of suffocating, so maybe shes trying to do that to him. I'd let her go or give her the space she wants then, if she doesnt come back unfortunately she just doesnt want to

Maybe but I wouldn't want to be in a relationship in which I couldnt share my feelings, could just be me projecting my own needs in a relationship

So you're suggesting he should not tell her how he feels?

I would say something, if she can't handle you at least bringing it up, then y'all aren't going to be able to solve problems together

From my experience I never really saw the manliness in trying to act manly, no one really thought of me as feminine although I think I made some of my friends and families heads turn after how open I was to being gay. I'm not gay, but if I wanted to suck some dudes dick, I would, and I think that kind of attitude can come off as feminine. At the current moment, I feel like people can be really insecure around me, I attribute this to my confidence and that I will genuinely press you on your ideas if I feel like you are being delusional. I think you become much more confident and assertive as you move up the spiral, and this fake kind of exaggerated chimp manliness falls away and by acting genuinely, a kind of smoother more natural confidence and assertiveness may arise, and that's definitely still interpreted as manliness by others if you are worried about other people's opinions, but it's a lot different than this seemingly forced I gotta be the strongest guy on top type competitive manliness. It's literally just tapping into what may or may not already be there, but just be genuine to how you feel and see if it comes through

Isn't the world being a mess just relative? Mess compared to what? How society could be? We may always be a mess compared to future societies and advanced compared to those in the past, I feel like trying to objectively label now as a mess is a pointless, one day turquoise individuals may be what's holding society back

For weight loss there is all kinds of research about carbs being a hindrance to weight loss. Keto diets have a lot of science behind them, I'm not going to link you because its impossible to avoid on google if you look up low carb weight loss. Also potatoes dont offer much in terms of nutrition so far as healthy fats and vitamins go, kind of just calorie bombs, which is cool if you're starving and need to put on weight, not if you're trying to loss weight

How do we even classify stage turquoise music? Is this by lyrics, or stage of the artists, or some other factors like how the song is composed/feels? I often find music that throws like low-key enlightenment references, and some use like Alan Watts voice or some shit. Such as, but it's really just like a quote or two, so yeah I don't even know how we classify music into stages

A trap that I've recently been catching myself in is kind of being half-cocked ready to reject thoughts that are too harsh/lazy/egoic etc. Giving a bit too much power to my thoughts still, they aren't going to drag me back down to hell, just thoughts

Same! Screw Leo we can't help but be idiots this thread has offered so much to me in such a clear way

Did you find affirmations or any other techniques useful in terms of programming your mind to be searching for that sense of I throughout the day?

I feel like "your own diet" means that you just kinda take it as it goes and generally try to be healthy and stick to a few kinds of food? I'm not sure, but I think people who are the most serious about losing weight keep track of calories. I think you should be too, you might be surprised at how many you're getting. On top of that, not all calories are equal in a sense. Protein takes more internal energy to break down and utilize, so like 30% or some number around there of the calories from protein you eat has to go into breaking it down, while its like a few percent for fats and carbs, but you can look all those numbers up if you care. The point is, the most effective weight loss strategies that I have done myself include high protein, it keeps you nice and full and I lost a surprising amount of weight just replacing one of my meals with a protein shake out of skim milk

Okay, I just didn't want you to kill me, I'm just fucking myself right now single lifeing it up so I'm not going to get in your way

Well if you were gay they could suck your dick, but my best friend is a guy and a lot of people I value are men, I wouldn't want them dead so I could fuck their wives haha. Maybe we can just kill the men with good looking dates, make a compromise. We can be sadistic repressed aliens together

You need to send her a comprehensive list of Disney movies you've seen so she can make the right analogies to explain, but uh oh, my deepest desire is that every man in my life died sounds harsh. I think what you're getting at is that we kinda wish we had everyone woman to ourselves sexually, at least I had that desire as a kid, and I'm not going to pretend like that would be a bad thing now if it were consensual, but I don't want anyone to die for that to happen haha

Wow thank you for that, I usually fangirl your responses but the Harry Potter reference really sold me. I'll be expecting you to explain everything to me in terms of Harry Potter whenever possible. But seriously thanks for the thoughtful response, I wouldn't ask you for one if I didnt value it

I feel slightly unresolved on the exact mechanism, although I'm kind of leaning towards thinking it's probably just this huge fucking mess of reasons ranging from loneliness, life purpose, types of choices made inside/outside of relationships and probably many more individual factors that range from person to person in their contribution to life expectancy. There is probably room for follow up studies to root the actual mechanisms behind this out. That's a really interesting point about the necessity of cooking and cleaning vs. financial stuff that is really in your face important, but it's still an idea to me to be tested even though it sounds good in my head. I think there is definitely the notion that women need men more than men need women at least when it comes to relationships, and I'm interested personally to know how true that is, although it definitely doesn't seem to have much truth to it. I also think this is kind of a hard study to unpack for a guy, what can we take away from this study. Even if it's true in general that married men live longer/happier lives, doesn't mean an unmarried man should force himself into a marriage to try and reap these benefits. Maybe there's a separate desire and kind of life that people want to live that involves wanting to get married, among other things that increase life expectancy. I don't even feel like this is nit picky as I can be, I think it's important to be able to pull something away from a study, otherwise it's just another set of words I have remembered, and I'm kind of curious if you consider this knowledge for knowledge's sake, or how you processed this study in terms of what does this mean to you and/or how you live your life.

Yeah just sounds like you don't really have a clear enough vision for yourself or what you're passionate about that, but you won't have to hit rock bottom to find that passion I don't think. It's nothing to stress over, just stay in tune with yourself and your passions will become more and more clear

Yeah don't worry, I think you're on the right path but that's up to you to decide what you want and whether you are going in the right direction. I'll talk about one of your points because I'm pretty heavy into science. "Does that also mean that Spirituality goes against Science and Empiricism?" NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, it does not. It would be more accurate to say spirituality transcends science and empiricism. I think it's common to ignore the very practical benefits of science in curing diseases, modeling solutions, increasing life expectancy and health, finding out what things apply to humans in general, what is placebo and isn't the list goes on. These things are all great, nothing wrong about science and empiricism unless you try to use them for everything. The problem is that people try to overuse science and run into a wall when they try to write the science of subjective experience and reality. Can you imagine how hard it would be to use science to verify the fabric of reality, it's not something you write down, it's something more than that, science won't help you discover what you are, and even if it could, would you be satisfied with some infinitely intelligent computer printing out a statement that says "you are one/god/everything/consciousness" or whatever answer it prints out? I wouldn't, I'd rather experience that, but people who are too into using science and cling to it as a tool of understanding reality will spend all day writing equations to an answer that is all around them. On the other hand, there is a lot of ignorance on the other end of the spectrum in terms of believing science has absolutely no value to it. Science is a tool, use it when it helps you understand yourself and reality better, to reduce your suffering and the suffering of others, drop it when it's a limitation to your exploration of your own inner reality, it's a tool.