Amun

This is an insightful video. Thank you for sharing.

@Arthur Thank you for your Reply. I understand where you are coming from. It is indeed not possible to know whether the results were predetermined before the conscious observer observes the results and the results might have been changed by the conscious observer. However the consistency of the results makes us think that it was predetermined independently from the conscious observer. But as you have pointed out this doesn't constitute a strong proof that the results are independent. My take on the topic is, the results as we see them don't do violence to what we experienced internally and the insights we gained (at least to what i personally I personally experienced), therefore the results can as well be accepted, altough with a healthy dose of skepticism.

I would like to clear some misinformation on this topic. There is an effort on the internet to make this experiment seem like conscious observation has an effect on the behavior of a particle. But that is not the case. In order to measure a particle, you need to interact with it, for instance you need to hit it with a photon, which on the quantum level changes the attribute (like velocity) you want to measure significantly. This does not have to be a conscious observer and in fact, if you looked at the experiment with your bare eyes it would have no effect because the act of looking doesn't interact with the particle in any way. What is significant about the experiment is just that, that as long as we don't measure the particle, it seems to be in a "quantum super state", you can think of it as the particle being in all possible locations in space that it can be simultaneously, like a cloud of possibilities. That is why when we don't measure the particle, it creates the wave pattern, because the particle being in its quatum state makes it behave like a wave. When we measure the particle, the measurement forces it to collapse down from all possible locations to one possible location (this is called wave function collapse and one individual possible location is called an eigenstate). That is why when we measure it, it creates the particle pattern. Because only one eigenstate can go through a slit at a time. Altough it is very significant that unmeasured particles exist as a cloud of possibilities, it doesn't have much to do with the observer being conscious.

This is a great insight. I had a similar insight only once where I was truly aware that if I am what i see and what i hear and so forth. I hope to deepen my insight like you have. Congratulations

I second this. It seems to me like there is a lot of "my enlightenment is deeper than your enlightenment" arguments going on. People don't think about how the other party is going to feel about what they say. Very often i see people arguing, "That is not the truth, this here is the truth." I'm glad someone brought this up.

Another way of asking this is: Am i the brain and the vat at the same time?

@TheAvatarState In that example brain doesn't refer to the biological organ, but rather symbolizes where perception happens / what perception happens to, whereas the vat represents what creates the experience of perception, which is similar to the matrix example where matrix is the creator of experience whereas the person in matrix is the object of the experience, to whom experience happens.

@Bluff thank you. What i wanted to say is for me a bit hard to express. Another way of asking the same question would be; "Am i the puppet and the puppet master?" or "Do i show to myself what i see?". Brain in a vat is a scenario often used in thought experiments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_in_a_vat

@NahmThank you for your reply. It appears to me that you apprached the question from a more idealistic angle. I was trying to communicate a spesific idea about the way of being. But thank you nonetheless.

I have not experienced the following thing directly, but it occured to me that is possible. Short question: Has anyone maybe had an experience where they realised that there is in fact no substance but only the experience of substance, which feels so real because we can´t really tell if something is real outside our experience. Long question: So you are right now in front of a computer looking at a monitor. How you know the monitor is there is due to light bouncing off of the monitor and reaching your eye which causes your optical nerves to generate an electrochemical impulse which your brain interprets. It´s best guess is that there is a monitor out there that you are looking at so it creates the image of a monitor. Now it is just a guess in the end, we don´t know for sure if the interpretation matches what actually is. Now let me approach to a similar problem on another level. How does physics know anything? Let´s look at electrical charge for example. We know there should be electrical charges because we know there is attraction and repulsion between some particles. Particles having a charge is the story, so to speak, that we came up with because it explains the phenomenon consistently without doing violence to what we knew beforehand. But it is just a guess, just like the existence of the monitor. We know what we know, not because we know what is but because we are able to observe the effects of what is. For instance if we suddenly detected some very weak gravitational force we don´t know the source of, we would come up with a story of maybe a very distant astronomical object that is for some reason unobservable causes this gravitational pull or something. So what occured to me is: There might as well be no monitor in front of you, but only the experience of a monitor, the apperance of a monitor in your eyes, the voice of a monitor in your ears or the sensetian of a monitor on your skin, but not a real monitor or not real substance of a monitor. Has anyone had an experience where they maybe clearly realised that there is no substance but only the experience of a (supposed) subtance.

@Yousefthank you

Hello people. i have been reading this forum as a guest for a while. I created this account to exchange ideas with fellow members on a topic i find important. I feel like technological advancement is often underestimated here and there is a general notion of being mostly focused on spiritual work rather than wordly work, and that is fine, but when i compare such groups with their historical equalivents, so to speak, i find, lets say for the sake of example, Leo´s community similar to a group in pre-renaissance medieval Europe that would gather up and discuss religion and maybe get people to leave the dogma behind. It wasn´t until when the opression of the church came to a certain level and majority of the people started feeling a certain things about the dogmatic nature of religions of their time that renaissance exploded. These conditions prepared the right enviroment for the step further which was renaissance and fall of Constantinople set it in motion. In my opinion the reason why Renaissance had such a strong impact on people is because the way it happened was organic. People were ready. Parallels between similar examples of other important transitions in human history can be drawn. How this relates to the topic i mentioned before is; You see, there are very few people who are interested in spiritual advancement today. And this isn´t their fault nor anyone elses. I remember a comment under a video on one of Leo´s videos. I´m paraphrasing: "I don´t think it is possible for a 9-5 worker to enlighten.". This might not be entirely true, but i would argue it is indeed hard. Now it might be a bit harder to graps what i´m trying to tell here because many of you might be coming from a similar 9-5 standart job background, so let me give a more extreme example: imagine people who have to live with constant hunger in Africa or South/Southeast Asia. If you offered them a choice between food and enlightenment, would they ever choose enlightenment? Please don´t get me wrong, i´m not belittling these people. But in my humble opinion suffering in the world must be reduced to a certain extent "artificially" so to speak to prepare people for the next transition. Technology must be developed further and used to efficiently feed people, to liberate people of their 9-5 jobs, to heal at least some diseases that plague our age. Now forgive me for giving this example: After Rome started enslaving black people, it was much cheaper to use slave labour to work fields and do certain labour jobs, that many land owners and wealthy people stopped hiring Roman labourers and switched to slave labour. This resulted in having a greater amount of wealth created in a very small amount of time but almost all Roman lower class labourers ended up having no job to work. For this reason for a brief time Rome distributed the extra wealth of the wealthier class to lower class and introduced a kind of global income. Certain food and clothing items and even certain types of entertainment was free for these people .Wealthy people didn´t mind because they were making much more many than they had been doing prior to African slavery, even with some of their wealth taken away. You see where i´m going to with this. Artificial intelligence and machine labour will eventually make it possible to introduce global income. I think when such conditions mature, people in masses will finally come to think : "Maybe there is more to it" and this will create the conditions necessary to make the transition into the next phase. The message i want to give is; yes, spiritual work is very important but such advancements in technology and science are also important in ways i tried to explain. It is important to remember that we stand were we stand today almost purely coincidentally, if not %100 coincidentally. We could easily be living under poverty, or under some other condition that would make it very hard for us to enlighten. I hope i was able to communicate what i thought. I would love to hear your opinions about it. I want to finish by saying that i claim to be neither enlightened nor a native english speaker, or not even a good one perhaps so please forgive my mistakes. Edit: Typos