ok yeah i watched the matrix a bit and thought about this.

ok you go around you consider everything real. well how do you know it's not just a hallucination, or better yet, a dream?

lemme hear your answers and reasons :)

Hm...

If it hurts, its real. :D

Like a brick, or knife...OW.

If you think that's a freaky question, I suggest you take a large dose of a dissociative anesthetic, a dose bordering on anesthesia. You'll be asking yourself that question for the rest of your life, and never really be sure of the answer.

I believe reality is closely tied to your perception. If you percieve reality different then everyone else, does that mean what you sense is real and everyone else is screwed up, or are you screwed up and everyone else is real? That is a very interesting question Insane. I believe that a person must explore their own mind to find the answer. If you are able to percieve the flux of multiple realities created by your own mind, would that not mean you are more capable of detecting the true reality? If the only soda you ever drank was pepsi, how would you know if that is the best one?

Anyways, I encourage exploration of your mind, not only would you come up with questions such as the one you asked, but you may also find the asnwers.

I just know :).

Actually, I had this unbelievable dream and pinched myself in the arm in the dream and it actually hurt. So no, it can hurt and still be a dream.

As I already tryed to say on other threads: Seeing is not believing

We can't see reality in accuracy. That' s the problem of problems. Matrix from that point of view is simple, It consists of finite bits of data. If scientists of Matrix tryed to find atoms there they probably would not. As I got the movie there are no structures as atoms in their (it's just a computer programm). It only effects human brains giving virtual reality
On the other hand Matrix through some programming could convince scientists that everything is as is (perhaps that is the case).
Then everyone thinks: "it's just too real to be unreal". More than that we say that it's too accurate to be unreal. But through our enterpratation of observation (the interpretation of interpretation) we don't get anything accurate. It's always a mistake present. I think that's why ideas about Matrix and other virtual realities are born.
And in Matrix there's no equality: some feel something about reality and some do not. We feel our reality equaly. Things yet get worse when multiverse comes to town but I would like to talk about other things here
It could be much more complicated if said that reality of Matrix resembles our reality in its completeness. Then we would have the same problems both in Matrix and in our reality
In the end we always come to the same conclusion over and over again. We need to consider different realities in order to structurize our own (if it exists)

If it's a matter of whether you 'd like to tolerate this reality or want to know exactly whether it's true or not it' than a matter of deep philosophical discussion which mostly leads to no convincing solution unfortunately. People listen and understand thing but somehow due to their own reality they consider themselves in opposition of everything they're said no matter what reason and logic are given to them. It attributes both to scientific and theological methods. None's perfect

My post is a bit out of structure or inner logic, but I wish to show how futile could our attempt be. Still I think positive about discovering new horizons on this subject

The problem is that there's nothing really to base any of this on. On a simple scale, the only other 'subjective' reality we know of, is how other animals 'see' or 'hear' or 'feel' the world around them. Insects, for example see a drastically different version of earth than we do. So to bats and dolphins and owls, etc....does that mean that those 'realities' are what really exist, and ours is simply subjective to what range of light our eyes percieve? We have mathematics to tell us that the world is a ceratin way regardless of how we see it, but if humans evolved with no eyes, would mathematics even be the same to us? It would be based on sounds or touch or smells, etc...

We are in a prison of our senses. It's hard to step outside them. It's hard to know how to experience something without 'seeing' it. Even the most subconsious activity of our brains, dreaming, is 'seen'. Although I know someone who was born blind and she has no idea what colors, or pictures, or anything visual is. She dreams in sounds, feelings, and smells.

Talk about a different reality. But those of us who were blessed with eyesight 'know' what the world really looks like, we have the art and architecture to prove it. There are certainly other frequencies of light and sound that we can't detect naturally with our senses, but on the whole the shape of our reality is in 3 dimensions and we can measure that. We're also able to mathematically peel the curtain from the 'multiverse' and get a vague glimpse as to how it could exsist. But again, we have no idea as to what the true nature of it is. Is our universe an ever contracting and expanding sphere, a bubble in a sodapop multiverse where other bubbles, some identical, are floating next to (within) us? It seems that the math is leaning in that direction. (read the recent scientific american to see how) But will we ever be able to see it, feel it, know what it's like to experience those other dimensions? Hopefully, but doubtfully soon.

Does it mean there are identical versions of ourselves reading the same or similar forums in another dimension? Are we in anyway connected to those other selves? Do descisions made in each dimension effect the other versions of us? We don't know enough about the nature of non biological life ( a.k.a. 'soul' or 'energy' or 'anime') to say, it's just guess work and frankly no different than religions speculation....(without the judgement, of course lol)

But it is fun to talk about. I personally can't 'see' other versions of ourselves littering the multi verse. It would be cool, sure, but I think the multiverse deals with matter and anti matter and shapes of things we don't really have a grasp on....

Regarding "Matrix'esque" realities, there's no way to tell.

But it'd be foolish to assume our reality isn't a dream or some advanced computer program. If it looks real, sounds real and smells real - it probably is real. At least until we can know for sure. Dreams can be very real, yes, but there are certain ways to tell that it's nothing more than a dream.

I don't really care - I'll behave like it's real and try to get the most out of it. If we suddenly start to panic because we think that it's an illusion, our lives will be all the crappier for it.

Now, will someone (Homuncul or speck?) please explain to me in layman's terms what this multiverse business is, and its implications. No, I haven't seen "The One".

I hate that film 'the one'. Please stop referring to it...lol... It's a crappy movie that only diminishes the scientific data behind the 'multiverse' theory. I wish there were better movies to examplify it, lol...but simply put the multiverse is what its name says it is: Paralell planes of existence that have varying degrees of similarties and differences to the one we reside in. Like Steven Hawking says, the idea of time travel is only possible when traversing not back or forward in 'our' time, but traversing into other versions of our universe that may be seconds minutes days months or years ahead or behind us. The idea being that in some of other 'spheres' of this mutliverse things evolved similarly to our universe, and there exists life on earth that includes the family tree that resulted in you. In some, the differences were enough so that you never came to be. And in some humanity never even came to be. Etc...

This also ties in the theory that every descision that you make results in the creation of another 'sphere' in the multiverse. For instance, this changes the classic example of if you went back 'in time' to kill your grandfather. In the multiverse, if you traversed time and killed killed grandpa when he was young, YOU wouldn't all of a sudden cancel out the family tree and fade from existence, instead you would simply create another existence in which you were never born. But that wouldn't negate the fact that you WERE and always WILL BE born in 'our' reality.

This concept is way out there, numercally suggesting that there are a never ending infinite amounts of spheres of realities in the multiverse. That's hard to swallow for me personally, but then again my mouth and brain are only so small....lol....i like the idea of it though, just not sure how realistic it is with the senses we've been born with. Although the idea that there is a much more evolved version of me in another existence that fully understands all realities and explains it better to a more evolved version of you who also understands it, makes me laugh at the futility of all this...

Originally posted by speck of dust
We are in a prison of our senses. It's hard to step outside them. It's hard to know how to experience something without 'seeing' it. Even the most subconsious activity of our brains, dreaming, is 'seen'. Although I know someone who was born blind and she has no idea what colors, or pictures, or anything visual is. She dreams in sounds, feelings, and smells.Some dreams are "seen" because we posses that sense. It does not mean all dreams are seen, my dreams contain all the senses. Maybe the reason she doesn't see her dreams is because that is a sense she never possesed. If I never had hands, of course I wouldn't feel things with my hands in my dreams. But it doesn't mean all dreams are felt with your hands. It is possible to utilize your other senses, sight does not have to be the most reliable one.

I do agree with our senses determining reality to us. If we have an inner model of reality that mirrors the exterior reality, all we need to do is use our senses to confirm reality. But what if the exterior reality is different then our interior reality? What if you spin around real fast, and offset your equilibrium? Your inner model of reality tells you that the world is off kilter, spinning or moving. But the exterior model of reality is not doing these things. So how do you know which is real? You could use your other senses to help in determining if one of your senses is wrong. In this case, you would use touch, your hands or such, to feel something solid and know that the world is not spinning.

What if your other senses confirmed that the exterior model of reality was indeed different then the interior one? Would you be able to adjust? What if your mind overpowered your senses? I think that is what happens in psychotic breaks from reality. Your mind over rides all your senses, so the exterior model of reality is replaced by your inner one.

Refering to my first post on dissociatives, what if you were able to completely eliminate the exterior model of reality? Your interior model is constantly checked for accuracy by the use of your senses, but what if you eliminated all senses? Your interior model would be constantly trying to check itself, yet all attempts would garner nothing. You would be in a sensory feedback, where your interior model of reality would warp and mutate because of a lack of positive feedback from your senses. You would be lost in your head, creating and changing reality.

A simple experiment on this would go like this: Take a video camera and point it at a television screen so that is all that you can see with the camera. Now use that same television to show what the camera is viewing. Turn them both on and adjust the brightness of the television untill you get something to appear. Now that is a feedback loop. If you have another tv or moniter hooked up so that you can view the feedback loop, watch it for awhile. You can move your hand between the tv and the camera, and this movement will mutate the static into an entirely different thing. It is ever changing, a very interesting thing to watch. Now, the same thing happens with your mind in a feedback loop.

Sometimes I wish I was in a dream like when I am in the principals office.:D

Thanks for the explanation, Speck. I wasn't that far off, but it sounds very weird indeed. I think it'd be quite hard to create a "time machine", as the decisions mentioned happens all the time. A new universe is thus created not every second, but below what even the smallest unit of time can measure. It's sickening to think about :p

Originally posted by munik
Refering to my first post on dissociatives, what if you were able to completely eliminate the exterior model of reality? Your interior model is constantly checked for accuracy by the use of your senses, but what if you eliminated all senses? Your interior model would be constantly trying to check itself, yet all attempts would garner nothing. You would be in a sensory feedback, where your interior model of reality would warp and mutate because of a lack of positive feedback from your senses. You would be lost in your head, creating and changing reality.

I think we couldn't survive if we removed the exterior model. We have many different senses that just won't work if they don't have an exterior model of reality. Among them are vital ones, such as the ones that makes you breathe, digest food and water etc.

A simple experiment on this would go like this: Take a video camera and point it at a television screen so that is all that you can see with the camera. Now use that same television to show what the camera is viewing. Turn them both on and adjust the brightness of the television untill you get something to appear. Now that is a feedback loop. If you have another tv or moniter hooked up so that you can view the feedback loop, watch it for awhile. You can move your hand between the tv and the camera, and this movement will mutate the static into an entirely different thing. It is ever changing, a very interesting thing to watch. Now, the same thing happens with your mind in a feedback loop.

Neat, I've wondered for a long time what would happen if you did the camera-tv thing you mentioned. So, does it show mutating static or what?

Here's something that's been bugging me too: Imagine a spheric room mirrors for walls. In it is a camera, or perhaps one of those windows with a mirrored surface on side and a see-through surface on the other side. Anyway, the point is that there must not be a single spot of non-mirrored area. Now, considering that if we could place some sort of illumination in this room, what would we see? "Nothing", mirrored?

Ah, but you can survive. That is the beauty of the dissociative. It can remove you from your senses, numb the body, yet not interfere with involuntary functions such as breathing, etc. It just makes you unaware of them. That is the trick, to seperate the body from the mind without putting the body in danger. You could do this with a combination of dissociatives and a sensory deprivation tank. I have experimented with it, but seeing as I don't have access to a sensory deprivation tank, I used the Ganzfeld method. Which means that I creat a constant sensory stimulation, combined with the anesthetic, and the body adjusts to the stimulation so that it feels normal. Sort of like how you feel gravity, it's there but you don't notice it.

It is possible to remove reality. To do so safely depends on the mental state of ones self, as with the absence of an outside model the only thing that you have is your mind.

C'Jais, I tried to find a link that might have some video of static feedback, but got tired of wading through the muck. It is mutating static, shapes, forms, whatnot. You'll see things in the static, but I believe that you see what you want to see. Case in point, most people do this sort of thing as a way to "capture" ghosts. Or images of them. That is what seems to be the most popular reason for doing such a thing. It's still fun to do.

As for the mirrors and light thing, I think it would be nothing. Maybe a white spot, or whatever color light is used. A blur would be my guess, because I think that you brain might not be able to process what the eye sees, so that is the best it can come up with. Just a guess. I mean, it would be an infinite amount of reflections, right? How would your mind process that?

C'jais:
Here's something that's been bugging me too: Imagine a spheric room mirrors for walls. In it is a camera, or perhaps one of those windows with a mirrored surface on side and a see-through surface on the other side. Anyway, the point is that there must not be a single spot of non-mirrored area. Now, considering that if we could place some sort of illumination in this room, what would we see? "Nothing", mirrored?


So the side where camera's located is mirror-glass. Actually our image in the camera would depend on the size of it. If sphere lets say of normal size and camera is big for it then we will see the color of light all over the image. There would a total chaos with photons in the sphere. If camera is microsmall we will see sometimes black sometimes colored image due to the chaotic movement of light particles (if of course our camera can capture with speed of light frame rate)

munik:
As for the mirrors and light thing, I think it would be nothing. Maybe a white spot, or whatever color light is used. A blur would be my guess, because I think that you brain might not be able to process what the eye sees, so that is the best it can come up with. Just a guess. I mean, it would be an infinite amount of reflections, right? How would your mind process that?

No it's easy because photons do not move simulteneously. Light is only moving with a speed of light so it doesn't make problem. Frog would not at all be confused as it can see photons separately. This image is quite easy to understand if you first understand the opposite image. For example there is space with no walls and light but a small flash light with beam pointing one direction. You 're black (non-emmiter) standing one meter away from the beam which passes from your left to your right. What do you see? Nothing because none of the photons reaches you. In fact you can only see light when the beam is pointed on you straight.

Regarding dissociative thing I think it's great , I'd like to try that without any doubt.

Imagine that billion years life lived with only exterior reality. Than suddenly in instance it developed it's interior reality which resulted in the knowledge of how to exterminate the exterior reality. Conscious life is gorgeous and we're it's most capable progeny

Originally posted by Homuncul
Regarding dissociative thing I think it's great , I'd like to try that without any doubt.All it takes is a little time, a little knowledge, and a few dollars. Well worth the effort.

If it can be objectively confirmed, it's real for any and all practical puposes. Who cares if it's actually real. If it can't, then why care?

I mean, even if my kitchen knife is an illusion, it still hurts me when I cut myself on it. So why should I care if it's an illusion?

And maybe, just maybe, there's a god out there somewhere, taking a very personal interest in my doings. But unless I know something about that god, it's pointless to worry about it (if I try to please it, and don't know anything about it I might as well piss it off, after all).