Way off topic. but nonetheless incredibly interesting interview.

The truth will set us free, so long as we remember to challenge it.

I say this carefully, as I really don’t want to spur a heated debate (please), but don’t you feel a philosophy of uncertainty would fall prey to its own subjugation? If he’s saying it’s impossible to know anything for certain, then how do I know for certain his philosophy is correct? And on that chance that it’s wrong, wouldn’t that suggest you can know (at least some) things for certain?

Edit: I will say, however, that I appreciate that he’s, in a way, suggesting a dose of intellectual humility. I appreciate that very much.

The truth is a fractal.

It’s all being run by the mice :stuck_out_tongue:

Reality is a fantasy… the only thing that exists is perception

or to quote Adam Savage… [quote] I reject your reality and replace it with my own.[/quote]

Reality is a fantasy???

Does that mean that I am a figment of my own imagination? :slight_smile:

[quote=32229:@Dale Arends]Reality is a fantasy???

Does that mean that I am a figment of my own imagination? :)[/quote]

yes… yes it does

It’s all a matter of degree. He’s right that it’s not possible to know anything with absolute certainty. So we make decisions based on varying degrees of certainty. It’s like the speed of light. The closer you get to it, the more difficult it becomes.

We’re bayesian machines. It’s served us pretty well.

[quote=32229:@Dale Arends]Reality is a fantasy???
Does that mean that I am a figment of my own imagination? :)[/quote]

Reality isn’t fantasy, it exists, but how I perceive differs from how you perceives that. For example, for blind people, since birth, they just can’t imagine how “to see” is. Or, your face have weird tones of green for colorblind people and that could be the real thing until someone told them that it’s not.

Like Geoff said, it is all a matter of on which level you look at things. On the lowest level (quantum level) there is no distinction between matter and energy. All matter is just energy… and ‘existance’ perceived on this level is something that isn’t there.

At the quantum level, matter is made of particles. As Feynman said “Jiggling things”. Most “massless” but some neutrinos have mass. Energy? Well… Some people say so. :slight_smile:

Perception of existence precedes a kind of consciousness, and consciousness precedes a complex structure of matter and energy forming a being. So, perception only occurs at a very complex high level, never molecular, atomic or quantic. As observers, we can perceive things at many levels as we have tools to help us do that. . :slight_smile:

Geoff’s observation is a bit off from my comment about Dale’s question. The “levels” on Geoff’s comment are about degrees of certainty about subjects, not structures of the matter or ways of cosmic relations, interactions and understanding (where I was philosophizing). :slight_smile:

Hey! I probably have a smiley face addiction. I notice that I have an impulse to put one almost at each line. :stuck_out_tongue:

Feynman was right, but the particles are ofcourse created from ehh… something. In the end it is all energy. Einsteins famous equation (E=M.C^2) tells us that all mass = energy. Enormous heaps of energy hidden inside mass.

I wouldn’t be so sure about that.

J.B.S. Haldane wrote: 'I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. "

Emphasis on ‘can’.

Hi Alexander, read this. In the comments at the end people made questions about E=MC²

And about our arguments, I see a contradiction, but I’ll assume that your position is currently the last one, based on Haldane:

Ah, I see what you mean. I meant that what we perceive as ‘existence’, as in ‘solid, touchable, visible’, is simple not there.

I am pretty sure that there is communication between quantum particles. That is proven, though not understood, in quantum entanglement, sometimes called Bell’s theorem.

And when there is communication, there is something like consciousness, albeit like a kind of ruleset or operating system.