🧵 Can Consciousness be Recreated?
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 08:37:29 UTC No. 16624811
If we assume that everything in the universe can be perfectly surmised as a string of information, then it follows that consciousness and individual awareness is also a string of information.
If we then assume that entropy death is not the final fate of the universe as a whole, and there either exist other universes or our universe is in a cyclic state of expansion and collapse, then we're for all intents of purposes inevitably going to encounter identical strings of information given infinity time.
If we assume that both premises are true, the first of which excludes the existence of souls, the second of which necessitates an infinite string of information, the only logical conclusion for what happens after death is reincarnation.
Are there any limitations for the premises or the conclusion that a scientist could take?
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:08:36 UTC No. 16624866
If the universe is indeed a violin bow strumming cosmic spaghetti strings of meta-consciousness, then every black hole is just a ripple of déjà vu on the galactic xylophone, right? And if we’re juggling infinity with a cyclic kaleidoscope of collapsing universes, then clearly a loop-de-loop of information spaghetti leads us to reincarnating within goldfish dreams. Does entropy dance salsa with infinity, or does it misstep into a cha-cha of quantum uncertainty? Also, if souls are merely philosophical Schrödinger’s cats—both existing and not depending on who’s looking—then aren’t we all just nodes in a galactic Wi-Fi signal of cosmic misunderstandings?
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:41:40 UTC No. 16624895
why are they blushing?
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 13:32:58 UTC No. 16624952
>>16624811
>assume it's information
Why? You assumption that this applies to consciousness also rests on assuming thath consciousness is part of the universe
>reincarnation
Does not follow. The existence of a soul is implicit within consciousness, to the minimal degree that its experience requires something to experience it, and that thing seems fairly tied to a specific consciousness, it doesn't float around or transfer between people if they hold their heads togther or seomthing
As it is not the same soul which inhabits others as inhabits you, for what reason might one assume an exception for a materially recurrent body? The conclusion does not follow the premises
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 13:44:41 UTC No. 16624961
>>16624811
>pedophile
>shits science board with x tier pseudoscience
Feel free to kill yourself, pedophile
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 14:08:17 UTC No. 16624987
>>16624961
uh oh meltie
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 16:37:13 UTC No. 16625126
>>16624952
I genuinely can't tell if you're a dualist, or a materialist using some esoteric definition of soul that for all intents and purposes equates to the body.
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 17:35:20 UTC No. 16625164
>>16624952
>/sci/ posters *still* tripped up by open individualism
lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 18:24:34 UTC No. 16625220
>>16624811
read about the no cloning theorem. sorry but you will never be you again
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 18:56:50 UTC No. 16625248
>>16625220
No cloning theorem is not at all incompatible with what I've said. Maybe you should read about it yourself?
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:29:36 UTC No. 16625283
>>16624811
Kill yourself pedo shitbag
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 20:18:06 UTC No. 16625306
>>16624961
>>16625283
Hey reddit!