what are the arguments against the materialist paradigm?

[Leo Gura]

Pluck has been banned

I welcome criticism of me, but Pluck was just spreading stage Orange ideology. He had no real interest in growing beyond it.

[John Iverson]

On 7/27/2018 at 5:47 AM, Pluck said:

Why am I here on this forum? To try and save at least one life from this corrupted cult.

@Shanmugam see this?? Hahaha i saw this coming remember what i said to your posts about sadhguru and i drop also Leo's name.. this is one of what i am talking about.. atsome point people will see Leo or Sadhguru or any other mystics out there that there is some wrong about them .. or judge.. or rejected there is infinite reasons and contenxt that could be made for us to not grow or I don't know i cannot explain thoroughly why ego is like that but better to see this ability of ego.. ofcourse he is not conscious and he thinks that he is correct.. I don't judge you man.. i just want you to be aware of different kinds of self deception and the power of inifnite intelligence of ego 

[DesertRat]

@Leo Gura I posted a new revelation today, was it too stoopit to not delete, or?  

[Laymen]

Pluck might have made a mistake Sheela made. He might have idolized Leo so much without doing meditation and then his life got fucked up and he blamed Leo for it. I like Leo because he seems to have empathy towards others. I disagree with some of his ideas though. Just some. For example: Leo prefers Sadhguru over Osho. Honestly, I don't like Sadhguru. He seems to me a harsh man saying HEAVEN OR HELL, YOU CHOOSE. From what I see, Sadhguru wants to people to create a traction in their life, the traction that he considers good, fitting with his eyes. He seems to think one is 100% responsible for his life. . From the way I see, the answer is no. Most people were born poor, not intelligent, not emotionally well-grounded. And it's understandable why they feel depressed. To be honest, I don't want to be born. It sounds negative but  it's the truth. However, instead of continuing to take my anger on others, I'm starting to meditate to master my emotions and live blissfully. 
What I want to say is we should be more empathetic and focused on ourselves at the same time. If we focus too much on who gives us the ideas, we do not take the ideas seriously. If things get too difficult for me, I can just commit suicide like Osho. No need to get angry at anyone. I'm not good at expressing my point of view, hope you guys understand.

[Lorcan]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Pluck has been banned

I welcome criticism of me, but Pluck was just spreading stage Orange ideology. He had no real interest in growing beyond it.

BREAKING NEWS: FORUM WARS - STAGE ORANGE HERETIC PURGED

 

I always think perma-ban in games and forums is always a bit harsh. I suppose he can just make a new account through a new browser so there really is no point in a temp ban. 

Edited July 28, 2018 by Lorcan

[Dodo]

On 26/07/2018 at 3:20 AM, InfinitePotential said:

Double slit experiment (matter is particle like when observed, wave like when not), quantum entanglement (instant cause and effect across distance, or different aspect of same object in multiple places), and quantum eraser (seemingly backwards causality) pretty much do it for me. But here is a ton more stuff that makes reality seem more virtual / digital than physical, worth a close read:

"Here are fifteen reasons why we live in a virtual reality: from Brian Whitworth’s, “Quantum Realism”

How can we know if our world is a digital construct or not? One way is to look for tell-tale signs, like pixels, processing limits, channel bandwidths and a system boot-up. A virtual reality should behave like one, so a critical analysis should reveal it. Surprisingly, physics tells us that our world:

Had a beginning: All the distant galaxies are receding from us at known rates, so it is possible to calculate back when our universe started up about fourteen billion years ago, in a first event that began not only our universe but also its space and time. Yet a complete physical universe can’t begin, as by definition there is nothing outside it to create it and to create itself, it would have to exist before it began. This leaves physics speculating on D-branes, alternate universes, wormholes, teleporting worlds, quantum tunneling, big bang-big crunch oscillation theories and other steady state variants. In contrast, every virtual reality has a boot up that creates its pixels and its space-time operating system, based on nothing within itself.

Has a maximum speed: In our world, a light shone from a spaceship moving at almost the speed of light still leaves the ship at the speed of light, which is impossible in an objective reality. Einstein proved that the speed of light is a maximum, but gave no reason for it. The equations increase an object’s inherent mass as it increases speed relative to other objects, which works but doesn’t really explain anything. In contrast, every screen has a fixed refresh rate that no pixel-to-pixel transfer “speed” can exceed.

Is digital: Everything at the quantum level is quantized, including time and space, but field theory assumes continuity, so it has to avoid the infinities that implies by a mathematical trick called renormalization. We think our world has no gaps but actually Planck length and time are irreducible and calculus implies infinitesimals. In quantum realism, pixels and cycles are expected.

Has quantum tunneling. For an electron to suddenly appear outside a field barrier it can’t penetrate is like a coin in a perfectly sealed glass bottle suddenly appearing outside it. Again, this is impossible for an objective reality although quantum theory permits it. In contrast, a digital reality allows “cuts” between one probabilistic frame (quantum state) and another (Ch5).

Entangles entities: Entangled photons maintain opposite spins no matter how far apart they go because quantum collapse works instantly across the universe. An objective reality limited by the speed of light can’t do this, so Einstein called entanglement spooky action at a distance. In contrast, a program can instantly alter any pixel anywhere on a screen, even if the screen is our universe. In this view, entangled photons just merge their processing until the next processing reboot.

Space curves: In Einstein’s vision, the sun keeps the earth in orbit by “curving” the space around it, but what exactly does space curve into? Space needs another dimension to do this, but string theory’s extra dimensions are “curled up” in our space, so they don’t allow it. In quantum realism our 3D space is a just a “surface” that can curve into a fourth dimension.

Time dilates: In Einstein’s twin paradox, one twin travels the universe while the other stays on earth, and the first twin returns after a year to find his brother an old man of eighty! In an objectively real world time is fixed but in our world it slows down as we go faster. Likewise, every gamer knows that the frame rate of a game slows down if the server is busy.

Randomness occurs: In our world, radioactive atoms emit alpha particles randomly, i.e. in a way that no prior physical “story” can explain. Randomness implies a physically uncaused cause that isn’t possible in a complete physicality. The many-worlds fantasy, or today the multiverse, was invented solely to deny quantum randomness. In contrast, the processor of a virtual construct can choose which quantum state becomes a physical state in quantum collapse.

Empty space is not empty: An objective space should be nothing but our space exerts a pressure. In the Casimir effect, flat plates in a vacuum placed close together experience a force pushing them in. Current physics attribute this to virtual particles created by the vacuum, but space as null processing is a simpler explanation.

Waves are particles: In Young’s two-slit experiment, one electron goes through two slits, interferes with itself to give an interference pattern, but still always arrives at one screen point. A particle can’t do this but a program can spread instances of itself like a wave but still restart at a point (quantum collapse) to arrive as a particle in one place. Processing can spread like a wave but reboot like a particle.

Every electron is identical: In our world, every photon, electron and quark is indistinguishable from every other one, just as if the same code generated all of them.

Quantum superposition: In quantum theory, currents can simultaneously flow both ways around a superconducting ring (Cho, 2000), and an electron can spin both up and spin down – until observed. Such combinations are not physically possible, so in current physics quantum states don’t exist, but in quantum realism an electron program can instantiate its code to explore both options.

Non-physical detection: Imagine a bomb so sensitive that even one photon will set it off. It should be impossible to detect, but scientists have done the physically impossible with a Mach-Zehnder interferometer (Kwiat, Weinfurter, Herzog, Zeilinger, & Kasevich, 1995). Current physics attributes this to quantum states that don’t exist but quantum realism lets those quantum states exist.

Retrospective action occurs: If the future can affect the past, causality fails and with it physics. Yet in delayed choice experiments, an observation made after a photon takes a path defines the path it took before the observation. This has led some to speculate that all time, like all space, already exists, allowing time travel and all the paradoxes it implies. In quantum realism program instances take all paths and the observation picks the physical event, so there is no time travel.

Anti-matter: Quantum equations predicted anti-matter, but no reason has ever been given why matter that inherently exists needs an inverse, of the same mass but opposite charge, at all. In Feynman diagrams, an anti-electron colliding with an electron goes backwards in time, but how it can enter an event in reverse time not explained. In contrast, processing by definition implies anti-processing, and if time is the processing sequence, anti-processing implies anti-time.

Each of the above alone is just odd, but together they form what courts call circumstantial evidence. They imply that the physical world is a processing output, so by the duck principle:

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

The ‘duck’ here is a virtual reality generated by quantum processing. Note that we would not doubt that the physical world was objectively real, if only it would behave so, but it doesn’t. In an objective reality time doesn't dilate, space doesn’t bend, objects don’t teleport, empty space is empty and universes don’t pop up out of nowhere. Since no-one has ever proven that the universe is not virtual, why is this option always dismissed out of hand? For example, Hawkings says:

“But maybe we are all linked in to a giant computer simulation that sends a signal of pain when we send a motor signal to swing an imaginary foot at an imaginary stone. Maybe we are characters in a computer game played by aliens.”

Then his next sentence was “Joking apart…” But why must it inevitably be a joke? Conversely, if we find that physical realism is impossible, the Sherlock Holmes dictum should apply, that:

“When you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”

If the physical world can’t be an objective reality, science must consider whether it is a virtual one."

It's not virtual or it would lag ? That's the number one reason I hate technology sometimes.

I believe it's more likely to be the dreaming of God - pure eternal awareness. 

 

On 26/07/2018 at 6:39 PM, Viking said:

 

 

Edited July 28, 2018 by Dodo

[Revolutionary Think]

@Leo Gura well I guess you plucked out his stage orangeness out of the community  

[Revolutionary Think]

@Lorcan good one.