joeymusicguy
Member
technically this is right AND wrong
because everything pictured in your screen had already existed
so its all past
if you can really look at the future on screen, it would be blank
Mind Jobs
- Thread starter coldthrn
- Start date
technically this is right AND wrong
because everything pictured in your screen had already existed
so its all past
if you can really look at the future on screen, it would be blank
DanLights
Santa Hat Forever
TheDriller
Member
It's the cover of the I'llEatYourFace Vs. L.A.M.P split EP called "Manual Strangulation"
plague_rider
Coffee
I started tripping the other day, too much caffienne in one go... my desk started to tilt... both up and down at the same time......
roy22341
Member
TheDriller
Member
professorlamp
I are Joe
So here is another one. Who has Hypnagogic? Hallucinating when coming out of sleep? I do this all the time. Ill wake up and see the walls looking like water, or giant birds or insects crawling on the ceiling. (Trust me this is a hallucination ). If you watch them long enough they eventually disappear.
My wife, girlfriend at the time, was up watching class of nukem high "got to love Troma movies" I was passed out next to her, lights were dim in the room. I opened my eyes and I saw a giant radioactive dragonfly fly into one of my bass traps. I get up and get on a chair, thinking this thing is real trying to catch it, saying to my wife do you see this?
Her face was awesome!
). If you watch them long enough they eventually disappear.My wife, girlfriend at the time, was up watching class of nukem high "got to love Troma movies" I was passed out next to her, lights were dim in the room. I opened my eyes and I saw a giant radioactive dragonfly fly into one of my bass traps. I get up and get on a chair, thinking this thing is real trying to catch it, saying to my wife do you see this?
Her face was awesome!
Uladyne
Greg
Trying to visualize more than 3 spacial demensions is definitely a mindfuck.
Contemplating the beginning of the Universe is also a mindfuck. Space expanding from the epicenter of the Big-Bang is a mindfuck. Not like an explosion where something is expanding into space, but space ITSELF expanding into nothingness and seperating clusters of galaxies from eachother fucks my brain.
Also if our Universe has a beginning, what came before? Mindfuck.
Time was created at the brith of the Universe? Mindfuck.
Visualizing existence (if it can be called that) without time? Mindfuck.
Is the Universe repeatedly expanding and collapsing in on itself, over and over again? If so, in what arena, if any? Is space creating and destroying itself inside a larger multiverse? What is the multiverse if not space? Mindfuck.
Has the Universe always existed? Mindfuck.
Why is there a Universe? Mindfuck.
11 spacial dimensions (or whatever String Theory is up to now)? Mindfuck.
For the record I've never done hallucinogenic drugs, but have read a few science books.
Mindfuck.
Contemplating the beginning of the Universe is also a mindfuck. Space expanding from the epicenter of the Big-Bang is a mindfuck. Not like an explosion where something is expanding into space, but space ITSELF expanding into nothingness and seperating clusters of galaxies from eachother fucks my brain.
Also if our Universe has a beginning, what came before? Mindfuck.
Time was created at the brith of the Universe? Mindfuck.
Visualizing existence (if it can be called that) without time? Mindfuck.
Is the Universe repeatedly expanding and collapsing in on itself, over and over again? If so, in what arena, if any? Is space creating and destroying itself inside a larger multiverse? What is the multiverse if not space? Mindfuck.
Has the Universe always existed? Mindfuck.
Why is there a Universe? Mindfuck.
11 spacial dimensions (or whatever String Theory is up to now)? Mindfuck.
For the record I've never done hallucinogenic drugs, but have read a few science books.
Mindfuck.
Uladyne
Greg
GarethSE
New Metal Member
- Jul 5, 2008
- 7,595
- 1
- 0
- 33
you hear that sound? that was the sound of my brain exploding.
also +1 respect chris for troma fanboyness
I cut out the ones that were outside my knowledge (string theory, for example) or too poorly formulated.
(1) It's not.
Suppose that you're talking to some one-dimensional bloke for one reason or another (don't ask how, just pretend that there's a guy living on a line for one reason or another), and that he lives in one spatial dimension and still has the usual notion of time, just to make things convenient and coherent for us. He'd have no idea what a circle was, since we need two-dimensional space to describe them, but we can use his perception of time against that. If you wanted to show him what a circle looked like, you'd just show him one-dimensional things varying through time and let him piece the rest together - if you passed a circle through his little line, he'd see a single point (when the circle first met his line) until that split into two points that grew farther apart, until the appropriate diameter of the circle passed through and then the points grew closer together, merged into one (just before the circle left), and vanished.
Similarly, if you had someone living in a plane, and wanted to show him a sphere (imagine pushing a ball through a piece of paper), you'd repeat this process and he'd see a point that turned into a circle that grew, then shrunk, then collapsed back to a single point and disappeared.
What would happen, then, if someone four-dimensional wanted to do this to us? We'd first see a point (you get the idea that a point is a degenerate n-sphere - not particularly useful, stuck with radius 0, but the most obvious such degenerate), then it would start to grow as a sphere, then stop growing and start shrinking, come back to a point, and then vanish.
Spheres are too easy, to be honest - far too much symmetry for anyone's good. If you imagined a hypercube, there are many ways that it could pop into existence - if the four dimensional thing 'passed it through' properly, we'd simply see nothing, then a cube, and then nothing again. For the rest... to hell with that, use a calculator and leave me out of it. For a triangle, in one configuration you'd see a point, then a growing triangle, and then all of a sudden the entire thing would disappear.
What's the point of this mess? Get used to viewing three-dimensional objects that vary with time, and you'll start to see four-dimensional objects just as easily. Lather, rinse, and repeat until you don't need to see any more.
(2) Obviously a rubbish question. Time is 'in' the universe, so how are you expecting to make sense of that? You're assuming a time outside the universe, to speak loosely, and in the absence of any way of measuring or using it there's *no way* to proceed.
(3) View the universe as a collection of snapshots parametrized by time and you'll see how this, too, is rubbish. Is 0 created at the start of the interval [0,1]? The answer, of course, is 'what the fuck does that mean, you confused twat?' and it's time to move on to something less befuddled.
(4) You see the trend by now - try to imagine a world without left and see where that goes.
(5) See the above - either it's obviously incoherent, or you're asking 'was there some time when the universe didn't exist?' and it's slightly-less-obviously incoherent.
For real mindfucks, precisely how the hell is Fermat's Last Theorem true? Think about the geometric implications of that wreck.
Jeff
Uladyne
Greg
I've heard similar explanations before, and while they definitely help to explain the concept, is the example not still merely a 3 dimensional representation of what we would expect to see of a 4 dimensional object in our 3 dimensional world? I've also heard the "worm maneuvering an extra hidden dimension on a tightrope viewed from afar" example, which also makes perfect sense (Though I like your example much better) but for a mere mortal such as myself, visualizing a 4 (or more) spacial dimensional world is still a mindfuck.
Since my original post I've put more thought into some of the other questions I posted about time and I concede that they are pretty rediculous, as you've pointed out. Before the Universe there was nowhere, and "no-when", so to speak in terms like "before"/"after" or the Universe being "inside" something seems a bit irrelevant.
I appreciate the knowledgable insight from someone who knows probably infinitely more about these things. It's like adding lube to the mindfuck.
EDIT: Something kind of weird that I just considered that probably has nothing to do with actual physics: There's always talk about extra spacial dimensions, and although space is considered just one part of "spacetime", what of the idea of other dimensions that aren't spacial dimensions, but are more like the time dimension (superficially separate from the spacial dimensions), but we have no perception of them? I guess mathematics would have suggested their possibility by now.
I'm way out of my league here and don't really know what I'm talking about, obviously.
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
Uladyne
Greg
On the first paragraph... no, not at all. Strictly speaking, our familiar spacetime should be regarded as 4-dimensional - you're just letting time play the role of that (n+1)th spatial dimension until you can visualize the whole thing at once. You can then start to picture higher-dimensional things, adding one dimension each time you repeat this process.
On the edit... I still don't know anything significant about string theory, but my impression is that the extra spatial dimensions (which make certain types of symmetry sensible) just haven't blown up like the familiar ones have. Check a real source whenever you can.
Jeff
Wait, you're agnostics because there might be something incomprehensibly smarter than you? Yeah, I can see that ending well...
Jeff
Jeff
Don't fret Jeff, you won't have to worry about me making effigies in your honor any time soon
Similar threads
