🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 00:50:14 UTC No. 16618304
1. Special Relativity implies that all moments in time - past, present, and future - are equally real and eternally present. There is no universal "now."
2. Therefore, suffering is eternal. No matter how much progress we make, it will always be there. All the dead are still around and are still suffering... forever.
3. Physicalism implies that consciousness exists in thalamo-cortical gamma oscillations of 40 Hz waves. It is substrate-independent and exists wherever the specific computational patterns occur. This non-locality means consciousness can reassemble across vast distances and times.
4. Most cosmologists believe the universe is infinite. In an infinite universe, every possibile configuration allowed by the laws of physics is manifested.
5. Therefore, experience cannot cease existing. Death is physically impossible.
6. Therefore, death is no escape from suffering. It perpetuates the cycle of rebirth.
7. To solve the problem of suffering, one has to stop believing in suffering.
8. Therefore, I am the only locus of consciousness in this world. Life is, to an arbitrary degree of certainty, a simulation.
9. If I am the God of this simulation, I can destroy the entire universe and end all suffering by killing myself.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 00:58:04 UTC No. 16618308
>>16618304
OP here, this is a very rough sketch of his ideas. Too lazy to further integrate his theories about the multiverse, quantum immortality, open individualism etc. If anyone wants to correct this, pls go ahead.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 01:33:33 UTC No. 16618336
Who's this dude?
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 01:39:50 UTC No. 16618339
>>16618336
a rotting corpse that was very smart and pretty crazy
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 01:42:58 UTC No. 16618341
>>16618336
Mario Alejandro Montano
https://www.youtube.com/@killssinga
https://vitrifyher.wordpress.com
https://www.lakemchenryscanner.com/
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 01:43:24 UTC No. 16618342
>>16618304
There is a universal now. Time is defined by the 2nd law. Only when heat death occurs will there be no concept of time
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 02:01:48 UTC No. 16618354
>>16618336
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIt
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 03:00:32 UTC No. 16618381
>>16618354
Youtube be on some shit lmfao
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 03:11:25 UTC No. 16618387
>>16618308
if the universe is infinite and every possible configuration is manifested somewhere doesnt that mean everybody in this thread is having an orgy somewhere right now
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 03:13:20 UTC No. 16618389
>>16618304
>Kills himself over the implications of a scientific theory that will most likely be replaced in <100 years
Why don't people (especially people as smart as him) realize that science is a never ending process of falsifying theories and creating new ones, and therefore they shouldn't take the current scientific theory as absolute set-in-stone fact (especially not to kill themselves over it)?
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 03:43:10 UTC No. 16618406
>>16618387
>universe is infinite
No, no,nono.
Wrong approach.
The void is infinite and there are infinite universes.
Somewhere out there an almost exact me is calling you a nigger instead of a faggot.
Faggot.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:08:18 UTC No. 16618410
>>16618389
He was in psychosis and took shrooms at some point
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:15:54 UTC No. 16618416
>>16618304
>1. Special Relativity implies that all moments in time - past, present, and future - are equally real and eternally present. There is no universal "now."
Not really. SR's spacetime doesn't change with time in itself, or define a particlar "now", but it's not a complete theory of physics. It doesn't really give an answer to that question, nor does it pretend to. This seems like a retarded interpretation by a larper who has little understanding of physics.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:22:01 UTC No. 16618418
>>16618304
> Most cosmologists believe the universe is infinite. In an infinite universe, every possibile configuration allowed by the laws of physics is manifested.
This is bullshit. There are an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1. None of them are 4. Infinite does not imply everything imaginable. We could have an "infinite universe" without every possible configuration of matter/energy allowable because not all "infinites" are the same size.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:24:10 UTC No. 16618420
>>16618418
Yeah wait, yeah no. No.
>infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1
is no different from a set of 0 to infinity of rational numbers. 0.000xxx4 would thus be the fourth count, and the number 4.
math is an abstract relational, don't get hung up on overspecifying
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:32:46 UTC No. 16618422
>>16618420
Maybe I wasn't being clear enough.
The point I was trying to make with my analogy is that "the universe being big enough to have every state" does not imply "the universe has every state."
You can make a one to one mapping between the entire real number line and the interval [0,1]. They are the same kind of infinite. At the same time, the number 4 is not contained within [0,1].
The universe being "big enough for all of the configurations to fit" doesn't imply all of the configurations are present. That is an assumption you are making without any real basis.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:34:05 UTC No. 16618423
>>16618354
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXI
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:42:32 UTC No. 16618426
>>16618422
maybe I wasnt being clear enough
numbers aren't real
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:45:02 UTC No. 16618428
>>16618418
>This is bullshit. There are an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1. None of them are 4.
We would eventually reach 4, why are you putting limitations
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 04:50:15 UTC No. 16618430
>>16618426
Numbers are more "real" than any of these bullshit "laws of physics." F = ma is a reliable heuristic, not some "source code" etched into tablets by a God.
The whole idea of "all of the configurations" is a purely mathematical one.
>>16618428
Let me know how many coin flips you need for the sum of the number of heads divided by the number of flips to get to 4.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 05:24:44 UTC No. 16618445
>>16618336
someone who took dmt, believed it, and drowned himself in a lake
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 09:53:22 UTC No. 16618600
>>16618445
he's a jester now
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:07:53 UTC No. 16618605
>>16618304
>Therefore, suffering is eternal. No matter how much progress we make, it will always be there.
Duh? You don't need special relativity to come to this conclusion, simple evolutionary psychology is enough. Suffering serves an extremaly important diagnostic, behavioral and motivational purposes, much like physical pain does but on a larger scale. We suffer so we know that things are not as they should be, and the discomfort it causes teaches us what to avoid and pushes us to get rid of its cause. Without suffering, there would be no progress. If we didn't suffer from being poor, kissless virgin losers, there'd be no chance for anyone to acquire resources and reproduce, and then we'd just go extinct, content with our terrible fate.
It is natural and right to want to lower suffering, but to think it should be done away with entirely is ignorant and unintelligent, primitive even. Suffering is good, it's here to stay, and you should be glad it is that way.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:20:31 UTC No. 16618608
>>16618304
>1. Special Relativity implies that all moments in time - past, present, and future - are equally real and eternally present.
Already wrong, learn what a light cone is.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:30:04 UTC No. 16618611
>>16618342
>>16618416
>>16618608
Never heard of the block theory of time? It's a pretty well-known interpretation of special relativity:
>It can be argued that special relativity eliminates the concept of absolute simultaneity and a universal present: according to the relativity of simultaneity, observers in different frames of reference can have different measurements of whether a given pair of events happened at the same time or at different times, with there being no physical basis for preferring one frame's judgments over those of another.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etern
David Pearce:
>If a "block-universe" conception of spacetime is true, then suffering occurring in what we naively call "the past" is as real and unalterable as what we call "the present". Moreover, post-Everett quantum mechanics suggests that Darwinian life abounds elsewhere in the Multiverse. In the vast majority of quasi-classical macroscopic branches in which sentient life arises, no hominin-like creatures will evolve capable of rewriting their own source code and abolishing pain, misery and malaise. So "future" suffering persists indefinitely too. Worse, if Linde's chaotic eternal inflation scenario should turn out to be true, then the amount of suffering in Reality is increasing exponentially. Its extirpation in any one pocket universe like our own would be a purely local phenomenon. The only crumb of comfort to be drawn from this analysis is that the scenarios sketched are all extremely speculative.
https://www.abolitionist.com/multiv
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:06:26 UTC No. 16618778
>>16618304
Ok, but it didn't work, did it?
I am still here to witness the world being retarded so obviously he is not the only locus of consciousness in this world.
Solipsism inevitably leads to annihilation - most likely the world IS the locus.
Considering all this we thus need to come up with a new way to enact the savior imperative.
If every moment in time is independently in existence and if all these moments represent instants of suffering, then those instants must somehow be destroyed retroactively.
How do we do this?
We currently consider time a dimension, however, the direction of time does seem to fundamentally follow the distribution of order throughout the universe, so we must ask ourselves what information is actually saved within the dimension of time and whether or not this information actually represents a unique space, which could be overwritten, or if it is part of the spatial dimensions at a fundamental level.
If the former is the case and if the universe therefore keeps track of all past states, it may be possible to overwrite the information inside of the time dimension by modifying the change of entropy within our universe and thereby reversing time, at which point the complete cessation of any life or complex thought throughout the universe would prevent suffering during the erasure process.
Finally the change of entropy in the system would have to be suspended in such a way that no measurement of time would be possible, at this point the universe would be eternally dead and in unconscious stasis forever, thereby ending all suffering - perfect physical harmony.
In order to do this, energy would have to be extracted in a non-classical way, from the vacuum for instance, or the physical laws would have to be broken.
This would then have to be repeated for any global energy configuration in the multiverse, in which suffering has ever existed.
For this outcome to be more likely the idea behind it would have to be systematically spread.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:12:40 UTC No. 16618782
>>16618605
And to what end?
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:45:33 UTC No. 16618796
>>16618778
Solipsism has only one positive position: there is at least one mind. This is not a sufficient condition to prove that there is only one mind.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:48:03 UTC No. 16618798
>>16618605
>Suffering serves an extremaly important diagnostic, behavioral and motivational purposes
That's only because that's the signalling system that happened to evolve. That doesn't mean life that doesn't suffer is literally impossible. Read The Hedonistic Imperative. It's possible that a system could be created that serves all the same functions as pain, but without the pain. There's even a woman named Jo Cameron with a rare genetic mutation that causes her to feel almost no physical or emotional pain, and she functions just fine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xY
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 16:41:48 UTC No. 16618842
>>16618798
>There's even a woman named Jo Cameron with a rare genetic mutation that causes her to feel almost no physical or emotional pain, and she functions just fine.
She does not function just fine. She regularly injuries herself, be it bruises, cuts or getting burned while cooking. Her hip had severe degeneration that she noticed only when her hip got visibly deformed and affected her movement, the damage was severe and could have been prevented had she felt pain and sought medical help sooner. She also had severe arthritis in her hand, which she again didn't notice until she struggled with gripping things. Which was also preventable.If she ever has a heart attack or an aneurysm, she will drop dead with zero chance of early intervention. She has no diagnostics.
And she still has it good, she's not the most severe case, which is probably because she's plain lucky. Look up the more common condition known as congenital insensitivity to pain. Children with CIP will literally chew on their tongues and fingers. A boy Pakistan suffering from CIP died at 14 from jumping off a roof. He was a street performed that already had severe injuries from regular walks on hot coals, literally driving knives into his arm and more dumb shit. A young girl with CIP in US has bit a part of her tongue off and needed to have her baby teeth removed.
The fact that Jo Cameron is the only known person to have lived this long with her rare condition should clue you in to it not being good for survival. Next you're going to tell me you got fucked in the ass by a ton of HIV positive dudes like the faggot you are but are yet to be infected, therefore condoms are redundant.
>It's possible that a system could be created that serves all the same functions as pain, but without the pain.
That system would still require an undesirable stimuli. You'd just bitch that it's undesirable too.