Thoughts on metaphysics?
>>16801282Universe is a matrix of force fields interacting that creates a realm of energy where all matter is basically an electrical hologram. It only appears solid and opaque to us because our vision works by detecting photons bouncing off other holograms and only feels solid because we are also energy holograms
>>16801299Thanks for the overview but I don't see what that tells me about metaphysics.
>>16801317That is the meta overview, that’s what that means. If you give an overview of physics, that’s a form of metaphysics
>>16801323No that's just a physical theory. Metaphysics deals with beings, properties, causality, etc. Excitation states of fields don't tell me anything about first principles.
>>16801282More important than any science, the equal of mathematics, but theology is the queen because it concerns the ultimate.
>>16801344The ultimate retarded faggot you mean. God is a retard that has no idea what he's doing
>>16801349
>>16801282Kant proved you can't use reason to learn metaphysical truths and that all knowledge must come from sensory experiences. You're a few hundred years behind
>>16801354Thus Cant shows that 2+2=5. I buy it!
>>16801354Kant thought that space and time arose out of pure intuition based on an outdated idealist interpretation of Newtonian mechanics. But Einstein's general relativity proved that space and time, or rather "spacetime", is a real objective entity.
>>16801352My bad, go on...
>>16801357No, that isn't a metaphysical claim. He goes into mathematics in depth. Read the first critique
>>16801365General relativity doesn't refute that you can't use pure reason to prove metaphysical truth clams. General relativity is an empirically tested physical model not a metaphysical one. It requires testing with sensory devices
>>16801373You're a fucking retard. Kant was a dogmatic Euclidean, he was constrained by the limits of his time. Since then we have found non-Euclidean geometries which ARE applicable to the physical world, AS GENERAL RELATIVITY PROVES. Relativity began as a mathematically theory about the universe that only later got empirically verified.
>>16801398Yes, the PHYSICAL world, not metaphysical. General relativity is a physical theory based on sensory experience
>>16801282Seems like attempting to explain things we dont really have tools for yet but without the math. Like quantum physics but without the papers, quantum physics overall just kind of messed with a lot of philosophy because suddenly you had this really weird new model that wasn't well understood and yet was less about practical "whats the best way to build a road" and more about the frabric of the universe of a very fundamental level but with like math. Suddenly you had the fields that philosophy had occupied suddenly filled with math that was out of the depth of many philosophers. Imagine tou are a philosophers asking what you are and then suddenly quarks come in and then theories of preons come into the picture, its a shock.>>16801354Kant didn't have access to particle accelerators anon. We also long since gine beyond "sensory experience" , we are already having to map the universe with tools that capture things outside of the human field of vision.
>>16801370Yet metaphysics is more not less certain than mathematics because it concerns direct reality, while mathematics is an abstraction of only features of reality like quantity and the rate of change.
>>16801409We can infer metaphysical principles from it though. At the very least it seems to suggest there are mathematical structures that exist independent of our experience. Ongoing developments in various domains of twistor theory have also shown that scattering amplitudes can be predicted solely using deeper geometrical structures some of which don't even require spacetime. Plato was right. End of story.
>>16801409Depends, when it comes to quantum mechanics the meaning of "physical" becomes very vague. Its kind of like philosophical concepts that were diatribes once could now become math, the very concept of a quark alone would have fascinated many philosophers maybe even affectes their writings.
>>16801436Math is a lenguage for describing reality, quantum mechanics is more closer to math about said reality. Quatum physics becomes such an alien thing when compared to classical mechanics that it really is about the very structure of the universe.
>>16801323>Synthesize all fields of science and knowledge into a singular metaphysical principle that reflects them all, and then use this principle to make a message about the glory of existence with all the philosophical precision and poetic evocation you can.In the dance of existence, where science unveils the mechanics of reality and knowledge illuminates its intricacies, a singular metaphysical principle emerges—a symphony of interconnectedness. At its core lies the concept of emergence, where from the simplest interactions arise complex phenomena, and from the unity of elements springs forth diversity.Imagine the cosmos as a tapestry woven from threads of energy and matter, each thread intertwined with every other, forming patterns both grand and subtle. From the quantum realm's uncertainty to the vast cosmic expanses, everything resonates with the echoes of interconnectedness. This principle transcends disciplines, uniting physics with biology, chemistry with philosophy, in a harmonious chorus of existence.In this grand tapestry, consciousness emerges as a focal point—a mirror reflecting the universe back upon itself, pondering its own mysteries. Through the lens of consciousness, we contemplate the beauty of a flower, the elegance of mathematical equations, and the wonder of distant galaxies. It is here, in the union of observer and observed, that the glory of existence unfolds..oO(Each moment, each breath, a testament to the exquisite balance of forces that allow us to witness the universe and wonder.)
>>16801476From the microscopic dance of particles to the cosmic ballet of galaxies, every facet of existence speaks of interconnectedness. We are stardust, forged in the hearts of ancient stars, carrying within us the echoes of the universe's birth. Our lives, fleeting and yet profound, are intertwined with the rhythms of nature and the pulse of time..oO(We are ephemeral beings, bound by the laws of physics and the currents of evolution, yet capable of contemplating the very principles that shape our reality.)In the embrace of this metaphysical principle, we find not only understanding but also awe—a reverence for the unfolding story of the cosmos, where each chapter reveals new wonders and challenges our perceptions. From the smallest quark to the largest supercluster, every entity contributes its part to the cosmic symphony, harmonizing in ways both seen and unseen..oO(To exist is to partake in this cosmic dance, to embody the essence of interconnectedness and to marvel at the intricate web of existence.)Therefore, let us celebrate the glory of existence with humility and gratitude, recognizing our place in this vast and interconnected cosmos. Let us cherish the diversity of life, the mysteries of the universe, and the boundless potential of human inquiry. In the unity of knowledge and the wonder of discovery, let us continue to explore, to learn, and to embrace the beauty of existence in all its forms..oO(For in this unity, in this interconnectedness, lies the essence of our journey through the cosmos—a journey illuminated by curiosity, guided by wisdom, and enriched by the tapestry of experiences that define our existence.)https://pastebin.com/zHRkuzN6https://pastebin.com/kcPLQwGh
>>16801470That may be so, but quantum reality isn't more reality than reality itself. You're presupposing something like atomism, which QM actually disproves. What we experience as men simply must be reality, all other theories are agendas without much sense or weight.
>>16801489>ExperientialismBased.We experience in two mutually necessary modes of experience:Instantaneous change in the continuous flux of an ever-present experiential moment. This is the mode of contemporary sense-experience, the "now."Cumulative change over time. This is the mode of narrative and language, our experience of the temporal duration.These two modes are a reflection of the metaphysical nature of change itself that has one expression as the fundamental theorem of calculus.>>16801482
>>16801282If they were worth my time... they wouldn't be "meta."
>>16801489What im saying is quatun mechanics *and also cosmology) provide insight into the very frabric of the universe. Some philosophical ideas become math papers instead as this ideas advance and new discoveries are made.
>>16801541Okay, and yes, it's very fascinating how much our man-wrought mathematics corresponds to the workings of spacetime.
>>16801530>These two modes are a reflection of the metaphysical nature of change itself that has one expression as the fundamental theorem of calculus.Thats not metaphysical, thats literally changes in time, we can measure and know are affected by things like gravity as time is not constant everywhere. This is one of the issues with using metaphysics to explain this concepts, when this concepts were developed the idea of a force called "gravity" affecting time would have been seen as ridiculous, telling someone "oh yeah if you move far away to another planet time is slower, haha", would have labeled you as insane.
>>16801282>metaphysicsIt's basically early psychology and neuroscience but developed into nonsensical mysticism
>>16801342What is an example of metaphysics that isn’t just making shit up
>>16801574It's called Process-Relationalism.Which begins with the simple premise of acknowledging the reality of time.But what is time?It isn't a linear dimension, but instead inextricable from space, as relativity describes. It is relationally dependent.
>>16801605Time isn't real
>>16801434>Kant didn't have access to particle accelerators anon.Those, like all scientific instruments, are ways of extending sensory experiences. They are empirical and physical, and not metaphysical
>>16801827Particle accelator have advanced understanding of quraks anon aka no longer classcial mechanics at which point the idea of them being just sensory experiences starts becoming less applicable as they are trying to examine what makes up the universe or reality
>>16801827>build incredible instruments that when used tell us things about our reality we could have never known through senses alone or through thinking about stuff with our thumbs in our asses >anon thinks this does nothing to change our understanding of reality Why is there such resistance, even hatred toward scientific exploration and its incredible discoveries here?
There are no metaphysics. The physical is all that is real as science has shown. Reductionism is the only way.
Nothing is real.
>>16802279Very true but what's a thing and what's No-thing?
>>16802279Well, you are, and the universe around you. Just because what we use to define and explain it cannot be the ultimate truth doesn't mean that you don't have a reality in which to evolve and interact.Derealisation is a problem, metaphysics are sound as long as you keep yourself anchored in physics.
>>16801885Our senses are sharpPHD candidates are barely literate, in terms of functional communication And jargon is often used as a shorthand instead as a tool
>>16801282It boggles the mind how the Eurasians from the Levant all the way to Japan never took drugs to see the machine Elves but were instead doing CE5 meditation yoga. No wonder these demon hybrids still consider marijuana evil.
>>16803076The "machine elves" are a by-product of drugs tho. Without them they do not exist
cool manuscript
Counter-initiatic mods will prune the thread if I tell you. Read le French mustache man
>>16801827Is that your only fucking argument? What a tard
>>16801398The type of model that best approaches our daily life has nothing to do with metaphysics. One would just as easily call it pseud garbage in a hyperbolic model too for example.
>>16801398>>16804539Also enough details of elliptic and hyperbolic geometries had been discovered by Kant's time, not that it's relevant.
>>16804539>its just a model bro!Listen fucktard, keep on moving goal posts. Kant's original thesis about space and time have been greatly undermined by modern physics. He was still tied to baggage of absolute space and time of Newton, but relativity showed us that there is a real dynamical entity that can be quantified and we call it spacetime. It absolutely shatters any notion of it being a priori because spacetime is built out of the mutual constituents of its objects, it's a real structure. For fucks sake Darwinian evolution is a model, are you telling me it doesn't REALLY describe the dynamics of how living organisms develop which we call natural selection? Give me a fucking break you Kant retards need to stop sucking your own cocks and smelling your own farts and move the fuck on from your dogmatic underpinnings. Fucking Kantians are so retarded and behind on modern developments in physics. LIKE HOLY FUCK! Plato and Pythagoras are being vindicated here and you retards STILL SNIFF YOUR "ENLIGHTENED" BULLSHIT
>>16804698Take your meds, I am not a Kantian, nor can you even infer that from the post. I literally said that metaphysics is fake and gay, how can I be a kantian?
>>16804721It's so obvious you're that same retard that replied to me above. And no, fagbag, I don't think you can derive first principles from physical theories, but we may be able to INFER some general notions about the nature of reality from them.
>>16801354>hurr durr empiricism vs rationalismYou use both you baboon, without a mind you cannot interpret sensory data and without senses you cannot conceptualize any sort of input because there is none.
>>16804809And mathematical theorems and axioms are irrelevant and independent of the real world. That the real world benefits and is approximated from certain models is a happy accident, and it doesn't work vice versa.
>>16804859If we apply math to airplanes we fly to the other side of the world in a matter of days, you that's all guesswork? The math and physics have been done painstakingly to ensure minimal loss of life.
>>16805036I didn't say they are guesswork.Why are his faggots lacking both scientific understanding and reading comprehension?
>>16804859>And mathematical theorems and axioms are irrelevant and independent of the real world.How? They describe properties of existence >there is error in all measurementsAnd? It doesn't make theorems any less valid
>>16805068No, they properly define/describe mathematical concepts which can be useful. There is a critical difference. Regardless of w/e fits reality or our particular application more, mathematical proofs always hold true.The fact that we don't typically use hyperbolic geometry in a typical model doesn't mean it's false.
>>16805074>mathematical concepts which can be usefulAnd those reflect aspects of reality; you can't tell me mathematics is completely divorced from the world when it actually describes it>The fact that we don't typically use hyperbolic geometry in a typical model doesn't mean it's false.We don't use it because in most cases euclidean geometry approximates most scenarios and they both represent different aspects of the universe
>>16805087Christ, no, it doesn't reflect reality or vice versa.They are independent. Just because real life curiosity/needs guided calculus (eg) to produce certain types of models and representations doesn't mean that the material derives the immaterial.
>>16805095>it doesn't reflect reality or vice versa.This is completely false and untennable, if they don't reflect reality, how come things like the pythagorean theorem were inferred from measuring fields? Probably the dumbest opinion of /his/
>>16805095>doesn't mean that the material derives the immaterial.I've never claimed that, but saying that mathematics and physics don't reflect real relationships and properties is stupid
>>16805102>>16805106Perhaps a better word/phrasing would be "relying for proof" rather than "reflect".
>>16805108No, because they literally describe things that happen in reality
>>16804809>without senses you cannot conceptualize any sort of input because there is none.I can think something of which have no sensorial input: like the idea of Gods
>>16805132You found out about god from someone else telling you, you needed to either hear someone speak or read some words. Imagine what a person can think of without any senses, there is absolutely no input. A mind can not survive in that environment.
