(no subject)
I sort of feel like I'm a copy of myself.
I'm not really sure what this means, though I suppose you could parse it as feeling 'out-of-sorts.'
I wonder, why do I perceive what my body perceives. I know that I don't perceive what another body perceives because it is not physically connected to my brain. (which makes me wonder what craziness would happen if multiple living human brains were somehow physically networked together. I suppose the closest we could come to this without violating scientific ethics would be extreme cases of conjoined twins.) Anyway... So, I perceive my body, and not those of others. I assume, (rightly so,) that others also perceive what their bodies experience. But where does the 'I' come into being. How is it that this seemingly self-aware mind that I like to think of as mine ended up in existence? I can imagine that my body could function just as it is now, without some sort of 'consciousness.' Perhaps it would even wonder why it was it, and not something else.
I understand why so many people cannot grasp the concept of not having a soul, some sort of metaphysical force/entity that connects to their body, that must exist indefinitely.
The consciousness that I call 'I' has already not existed for what becomes practically the entire span of the universe's history, and will not exist for practically the rest of existence into the future.
I've often thought about my own existence, whatever it is, (for example, an emergent property/phenomena of the brain's physical process), but what's even crazier is the idea that I could not have existed ever, in the past/present/future. There are an infinite number of individuals that don't, and never will, exist. It's just that they don't exist, so they aren't able to question their non-existence.
On NPR a few weeks ago, or some other similar science-y program, I listened to a discussion between a bunch of theoretical physicists. They were discussion quantum theory and other things and waxing poetic about hopefully finding sub-particles such as the Boson. One of them was talking about a theory that involves the existence of multiple universes, which is coupled (I believe) with quantum indeterminism... that each time a quantum particle can be in one state or another, the Universe (somehow) branches into 1 universe for each possible state of that quantum particle. Then, this led to work that people have done with the Cosmological constant, and/or Planck's constant, and how if these numbers were any different, we might just not have a universe that could support life. (I think these numbers govern how quickly the universe is expanding.)
One of them said, that the only way he could describe it is this: "The cosmological constant is precisely what it is, because there are conscious beings (I think he said humans) alive today that are able to study and discern just what the cosmological constant is."
This sort of seems like circular reasoning, or perhaps it seems self-evident. It is very similar to my thoughts on existence/non-existence. The constant has already been set, and we've already emerged. One cannot sit outside of set that includes everything that physically exists and simply calculate the probability that the constant would be what it is. From where we sit today, the probability of it being just what it is, is roughly 100%.
Those who do not exist, do not get to question their non-existence.
On a lighter note, the weather has been quite nice. After being multi-week funk, which I shall blame entirely on the realization that I'll soon be exposed to the "real world," I'm feeling much better about things.
You know how it is, the economy+Michigan+recession+(having to pay back student loans)+realizing that after 10 years, I'll finally be graduating (VERY likely this coming December), only to be dumped face-first into, well, you all know what the international recession is like. But, I thought about it a lot; and I spoke with my adviser today. I changed my major a few days ago from one Comp-sci to another comp-sci, but I think I'll change it back. I'll probably talk with the graduate school adviser sometime soon, just so I can get a feel for what it's all about.
Well, that's about it.
I'm not really sure what this means, though I suppose you could parse it as feeling 'out-of-sorts.'
I wonder, why do I perceive what my body perceives. I know that I don't perceive what another body perceives because it is not physically connected to my brain. (which makes me wonder what craziness would happen if multiple living human brains were somehow physically networked together. I suppose the closest we could come to this without violating scientific ethics would be extreme cases of conjoined twins.) Anyway... So, I perceive my body, and not those of others. I assume, (rightly so,) that others also perceive what their bodies experience. But where does the 'I' come into being. How is it that this seemingly self-aware mind that I like to think of as mine ended up in existence? I can imagine that my body could function just as it is now, without some sort of 'consciousness.' Perhaps it would even wonder why it was it, and not something else.
I understand why so many people cannot grasp the concept of not having a soul, some sort of metaphysical force/entity that connects to their body, that must exist indefinitely.
The consciousness that I call 'I' has already not existed for what becomes practically the entire span of the universe's history, and will not exist for practically the rest of existence into the future.
I've often thought about my own existence, whatever it is, (for example, an emergent property/phenomena of the brain's physical process), but what's even crazier is the idea that I could not have existed ever, in the past/present/future. There are an infinite number of individuals that don't, and never will, exist. It's just that they don't exist, so they aren't able to question their non-existence.
On NPR a few weeks ago, or some other similar science-y program, I listened to a discussion between a bunch of theoretical physicists. They were discussion quantum theory and other things and waxing poetic about hopefully finding sub-particles such as the Boson. One of them was talking about a theory that involves the existence of multiple universes, which is coupled (I believe) with quantum indeterminism... that each time a quantum particle can be in one state or another, the Universe (somehow) branches into 1 universe for each possible state of that quantum particle. Then, this led to work that people have done with the Cosmological constant, and/or Planck's constant, and how if these numbers were any different, we might just not have a universe that could support life. (I think these numbers govern how quickly the universe is expanding.)
One of them said, that the only way he could describe it is this: "The cosmological constant is precisely what it is, because there are conscious beings (I think he said humans) alive today that are able to study and discern just what the cosmological constant is."
This sort of seems like circular reasoning, or perhaps it seems self-evident. It is very similar to my thoughts on existence/non-existence. The constant has already been set, and we've already emerged. One cannot sit outside of set that includes everything that physically exists and simply calculate the probability that the constant would be what it is. From where we sit today, the probability of it being just what it is, is roughly 100%.
Those who do not exist, do not get to question their non-existence.
On a lighter note, the weather has been quite nice. After being multi-week funk, which I shall blame entirely on the realization that I'll soon be exposed to the "real world," I'm feeling much better about things.
You know how it is, the economy+Michigan+recession+(having to pay back student loans)+realizing that after 10 years, I'll finally be graduating (VERY likely this coming December), only to be dumped face-first into, well, you all know what the international recession is like. But, I thought about it a lot; and I spoke with my adviser today. I changed my major a few days ago from one Comp-sci to another comp-sci, but I think I'll change it back. I'll probably talk with the graduate school adviser sometime soon, just so I can get a feel for what it's all about.
Well, that's about it.