The Nature of Reality

I haven't been on HipForums for quite some time. I was trying to write and finally get some things published after many years. But there was an orange cancer spreading across the collective body and like a picture of Covid, it had these red growths that popped up everywhere as hats, each one covering a pustule filled with pus and fecal mass, and every time the pustule would open up, out would spew toxins of Nationalist ideology, and hate and division. Armed with memes and an instagram account, I set out on the hero's journey, and jumped into the chaos of social media, and made my way into the labyrinth of the Thanatos of modern day democracy. So the fight to stop this cancer kept me busy. And while it is not over, at least, there was time to breathe; I could return home to lick my wounds, and tend to daily life, and I could write.

But no, MeAgain introduces this sexy sweet lady, scantily clad in the most erotic negligee, with the name, The Nature of Reality, and once again I am seduced, and shirk all responsibilities, abandon all projects, reject the calls to adventure, and hide in dark corners from my wife, so that I may lay down in bed with her... Ohhh, The Nature of Reality, what soft skin you have, what supple breasts... My writing calls me, but no, just a few more hours, shall I lay here with you, no, a few days... oh what sweet lips... Ok, a few months I will lie here enjoying your venereal gifts and pleasures. My wife demands attention, but I am once again oblivious... A new mistress has overtaken my mind and sensibilities!

 

Sure it can, you just need more acid...

 

I am late to the party, so let me step back to page 3

As a phenomenalist, I would argue that it is the phenomena of the object that exists together with the object and the observer. All that we know of the external world is experienced within (hence there is no stimulus external to the senses), but this reality is non-physical because everything of the mind, including the perception received from our senses, is, by definition, non-physical. Therefore the object that we know, existing between the object and the observer, is non-physical.

While the object-in-itself is physical, its physicality, in my view, is limited to the present moment, and outside of the present there is no physical existence.

 

Exactly!

Though I would again take this one step further--if physical existence is only of the present and limited to the present, only to the Now, then for physical things, any phenomena from a previous moment; a previous Now--is the phenomena of an other object. In this way an object could reside in deep space for example, where nothing but it, alone, exists. (Granted, even in deep space there would be the Other, experienced as light from distant galaxies and stars).

This phenomena from previous moments is the quantum information that maintains the form and existence of that object. (As you may recall I argue that the probability wave, or quantum wave, and the superpositioned reality of particles as waves to be nonphysical. This also includes energy, until it manifests physically, by collapsing into a physical particle to generate its phenomena--such as a photon for electromagnetic energy).

But in physical reality there is always an Other---the universe itself. For example, we could argue that the assertion of existence requiring the existence of the Other is wrong because science has demonstrated that particles can randomly appear in a complete vacuum, which is exactly what we would expect if particles as waves were superpositioned--that they simultaneously exist in infinite positions all through time and space until they collapse into a single space-time position as a particle, and that this is the nature of quantum randomness. But we are faced with the problem here that this particle manifests as a solitary object (actually we have to 'assume' that this happens because if we detected a random particle appearing in a vacuum then it could not have been solitary because, obviously it had to be detected by something other than itself---a device of some sort that perceived the phenomena of it). But the fact is, this vacuum is still within the physical universe, so it cannot be truly isolated and alone. The Other can be the physical universe itself. But you already stated that---space without an object cannot be conceived, and the even more obvious inverse conclusion as I have stated it, an object without space cannot be conceived---which, when you put it that way is a 'No duhhhh' moment.

The description you provided of vacuity is how I see the nonphysical reality, or dimension, of the wave. Quantum randomness and superposition means that this reality represents absolute potentiality. For us it is a vacuity, because having infinite positions is the same as having no positions. But that absolute potentiality collapses into a singularity of actuality in the Now when a specific particle manifests as a physical object.

 

I suppose the universal moment exists exactly now and everywhere . The sensuality of light-years is not
very important in perceiving the reality of a distant galaxy . For this , I have believed if existence ever would
become nothing it would do so now , or at least Life would die from a broken heart . Why do we play with
this kind of death ?

 

A relationship may be two thoughts held in firm measure . Iffiness is a poor relationship , yet academics are so fond
of the if-then format being fundamental to reasoning .

I would not care to have reality based upon the self . So , then I tried selflessness . Nah .
I'm more content with a philosophy of relationism , a talking raven in each hand . Little
children find this interesting .

 

To include your comments on page 3 of this thread, about reality needing to be perceived perhaps the problem is not Who the percipient is but What the percipient is. In my own view of reality, being that physicality exists only in the present per my argument, and that physicality represents the totality of all quantum collapses of subatomic particles within that moment (or at least as close to the quantum world comes to collapses into such particles), then this present moment must represent an incredibly small period of time, I see it as a moment of Planck Time which is the smallest amount of time in which physical existence is even possible without violating the laws of physics. This is truly as infinitessimal as physicality can get, but at this edge of existence, phenomena can be generated. Therefore existence is merely the generation of phenomena.

Obviously such minute phenomena is not humanly observable in any understandable way. But the phenomena generated would represent the generation of quantum information. If an object were changed, like an object was moved, or moved of its own, or a bite taken from an apple, for example, then this would represent a change in quantum information; that is new information would change the existing information. In other words the percipient is quantum information.

In this way an object could have both an independent existence and an independent reality without observation by a human observer.

However, such a reality would be meaningless to us--it would be the unknowable that you speak of, or much like the noumenal reality of the thing-in-itself of Kant. So for us, it would be back to the reality that that MeAgain is describing, in that our reality is what we perceive.

 

Nothing really exists...

 

Why certainly non-existence may be experienced . It is the one memory of a nothingness long ago that is inseparable from absolute lonesomeness .

 

A dreamless sleep is tedium . So much more so is adventure-less consciousness . I dream art .