• wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Maybe you just don’t understand how I use them?

    If you assume I’m using them nonsensically, then yes, I suppose they would seem nonsensical to you…

  • tetris11@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    I do subscribe to a small comfort belief that our consciousness isn’t just encoded in our neurons but has a radiative component that constructively/destructively interferes with the environment on some small level we atttibute to random events, and that when we die, we sever only the somatic component of our consciousness but our radiative part lives on encoded into a wider network of ambient thought.

    Sort of like ghosts/an afterlife, but less moaning and chain rattling and more general vibing the emotion of a park bench from the overlapped thought networks that ever intersected it

    Might be in the wrong sub…

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      Cool, so you have evidence for this? Or do you routinely believe in outrageous things with zero evidence?

      • tetris11@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        The latter, with a ‘s/routinely/rare/’

        I also have some curious thoughts about higher dimensional beings as well as some murmurs about what the rustling of trees might be a proxy for if you need the extra fodder, or just a fun drink in a pub somewhere

    • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      What you are describing maps quite well to the Quantum Memory Model (accessible explanation here) of Physics. Certainly considering information a fundamental quantity that can neither be created nor destroyed is becoming a popular concept.

      • They conscript themselves unto a diminutive solace tenet that our noetic essence is not merely inscribed within our cerebral neurons but encompasses a resplendent effulgence that constructively/destructively commingles with the circumambient firmament upon some infinitesimal stratum we ascribe to capricious vicissitudes, and that upon our demise, we sunder solely the corporeal partition of our noetic essence whilst our effulgent essence endures, enscrolled within a vaster concatenation of ambient cogitation.

        Somewhat reminiscent of phantasms/an empyrean continuance, yet less plaintive wailing and clanking of fetters and more ethereal attunement to the affective emanation of a park bench amid the interlaced noetic filigrees that have ever impinged upon it.

        They might be in the wrong comm though…

        • tetris11@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          Lo verrily, I thank thee kind gentleman scholar to the spirit of thine timely repose of which mine gedankenings give flight to the fanciness of bees. May the everlasting illumination of others through proxy prose continue to be a boon to those who entreat upon it!

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      I think consciousness is more than just our neurons, it’s an active waveform riding and guided by them.

      Unfortunately, I don’t think it survives death. Without the underlying structure, it collapses to noise.

      Interestingly, our brains have special circuits, design to emulate others. In effect, our consciousness imprints onto theirs. It’s not the full pattern, and imperfect, but a part of us lives on in the consciousness of everyone who knows us.

      Like ripples in a pond. The water of the initial wave is no longer involved, but it has passed to others.

      • tetris11@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        Interestingly, our brains have special circuits, design to emulate others. In effect, our consciousness imprints onto theirs. It’s not the full pattern, and imperfect, but a part of us lives on in the consciousness of everyone who knows us.

        I think this is a far better explained version of what I’m yammering on about. Echoes of yourself living on in other conscious beings, fragmented 1000fold into the general aether of all those you’ve interacted with

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          It’s useful to understand the mechanisms, it helps you to understand both what it can do, and its limitations. E.g. they can only mirror the parts they see or talk about. The parts of yourself that you hide away will be lost from their imperfect model.

          For more info, it generally falls under “mirror neurons”. They help us empathise with others. E.g. when we smile, certain mirror neurons start firing. When we see someone smile, the same ones fire. We feel the appropriate emotions because of this. They also fire preemptively. E.g. when you hear your mother yelling about the mess, even though you’ve lived alone for a decade.

          • tetris11@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            20 days ago

            Ah right. I guess I’m sort of implying that the hidden parts are also imprinted somehow too, through a vague hand-wavey mechanism that I’ve yet to define

  • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    World appears to be solid/stable at first but on closer inspection is actually vibratory.

    It’s ok to have points of agreement. You don’t have to mock and bicker 100% of the time.

    • monotremata@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      This is what I don’t like about the top meme, though. Like, yes, energy, frequency, and vibration are all things. Obviously. But the top meme is implying that everyone should believe that those things work in the specific ways that the woo practitioners say they do, and that’s a very different demand. More, it’s implying that people who doubt those effects are ignoring obvious evidence, when in fact the people who doubt those effects do so because nobody has been able to demonstrate reliable evidence for them. It has a nasty gaslighting overtone to it.

      • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        There’s not enough information in the top meme to know what theories it’s about.

        Things vibrate in a way that isn’t obvious to an unexamined view. If I look at a pebble, it appears to be non-vibratory, still. But a mystic or scientist who has really investigated it closely, exposed it to close analysis, can tell you that the reality of the pebble is vibration, not stillness.

        • monotremata@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          I mean, it’s talking about people thinking that “energy, frequency and vibration are just mystical nonsense.” People don’t think that if you talk about an FM station broadcasting on a particular frequency, or about the frequency of light absorbed by particular atomic orbitals. They think that if you’re explaining that you’ve slept much better since you placed jasper and amethyst on the ley lines near your bed to absorb the negative frequencies.

          The implication in the meme that anyone who is using these terms cannot be indulging in mystical nonsense, because these terms can also apply to real things. In fact, though, mystic cranks have been coopting scientific terms for ages, and they show no signs of slowing down. It’s a real problem that people confuse crap with science.

    • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      People who believe in “auras” and actually think that thinking good thoughts in relation to a specific thing will affect it on any way are deserving of mockery.

      It’s religion for people who don’t like organized religion.

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        https://scienceinsights.org/do-humans-glow-the-science-of-our-bodys-invisible-light/

        The answer to whether humans glow is a definitive yes. Our bodies continuously emit a faint, steady light, a phenomenon known as Ultraweak Photon Emission (UPE), or biophotons. This glow is a byproduct of our fundamental biological processes, rendering it completely invisible to the naked eye. Unlike the dramatic, visible light produced by fireflies (bioluminescence), this subtle radiance provides scientists with a novel way to peer into the inner workings of cellular health and metabolism.

        How does it feel to be confidently wrong?

        • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          He wasn’t.

          You can’t see the biophotons.

          Humans have no way of detecting, experiencing them, without complex instruments.

          They do not factor in to any decision making activity in our brain, because we have no senses capable of receiving them as input.

          Read your own source.

          The way that people colloquially use ‘aura’ is as if they have some kind of magical ability to see things other people can’t, that indicate things about that aura-haver’s emotional or mental or spiritual state.

          They can’t, biophotons do none of that, they’re just a nearly undetectable form of light that’s emmitted by essentially anything that has an active metabolism, ie, is not dead.

          They’re just using a made-up concept to describe internal herusitics in their mind, ie, their intuition.

          Sure, they’ve used their mind in the way that your last two sources sort of hint at, but its a delusion, its failing to understand their own mind giving rise to a psuedo religious concept.

          The only reality, the only power in ‘auras’ as a concept is sociological, indirect, as a reference with no referent.

          Auras being a thing be people can see and use… that’s on the same level of ‘real’ as ‘Christ died for our sins’.

          If you mean to use a different definition of aura, as in just a glow of light, then sure, technically all living matter has an imperceptible aura.

          Could these UPEs play some kind of way into extremely short distance cellular interactions? Yes!

          But thats… not what people mean, 95% of the time, when they’re talking about a person’s aura.

          This is the whole problem of using woo woo terms.

          You can’t conflate two different meanings of words and then act like that is not what you are doing.

          You also should specify what you mean, in cases where a word has different meanings in different domains.

          • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            20 days ago

            The whole thing about auras is that they’re not visibly perceptible either. Some people claim to be able to see them, but that’s a completely separate argument from the much more common belief that they exist.

            And according to science, they do exist. They can be detected with certain instruments and even reveal data about health and metabolism.

            Biophotons are an imperceptible glow of light that surround living organisms. Auras are an imperceptible glow of light that surround living organisms. Therefore, biophotons are auras.

            You can call bullshit on someone claiming to be able to see auras, but if you’re saying auras don’t exist because science calls them something different, then you’re simply wrong.

            • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              If you mean to use a different definition of aura, as in just a glow of light, then sure, technically all living matter has an imperceptible aura.

              Could these UPEs play some kind of way into extremely short distance cellular interactions? Yes!

              But thats… not what people mean, 95% of the time, when they’re talking about a person’s aura.

              This is the whole problem of using woo woo terms.

              You can’t conflate two different meanings of words and then act like that is not what you are doing.

              You also should specify what you mean, in cases where a word has different meanings in different domains.

              • Myself, from the comment you replied to.
              • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                20 days ago

                So you decided to monopolize the meaning of the term as strictly something that you can point to as obviously wrong, and when I point out that that’s a mischaracterization you cite… yourself… as corroborating evidence.

                You go champ.

        • xep@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          There’s more and more evidence that we are affected by and emit light in various ways. Did you also know that there is a flash of light when a sperm meets an egg?

          Since light is a kind of radiant energy and we evolved alongside the sun for so long, it’s not actually that far a leap that our biology would make use of it in some way, if you think about it.

      • Dream@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        You’re changing the subject to auras and telekinesis: not what was being discussed.

        What will the mockery get for you?

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          Hopefully the people mocked will adapt to social pressure and change their beliefs in order to fit in better. Bullying generally does work, even if it sucks.

          • Dream@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            20 days ago

            Do you know this first-hand? Give us an example of a belief you hold primarily because of bullying.

      • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        There are people who deny Reality is made of vibrations. They are absolutely deserving of kind & respectful correction, because it’s a wrong view.

  • Melobol@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I only saw the top part of the picture at first, and I was very confused: “Why is this in Science Memes?”

  • HrabiaVulpes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    To be honest… electric field you are surrounded by every day most likely affects you more than position of Saturn on the night sky… But people who claim that new tech is causing medical issues are considered crackpots.

    Believing in astrology is much safer.

  • Ech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    They also seem to believe wi-fi “powers everything”? What a loon.

  • U7826391786239@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    if someone is trying to “convert” you to esoteric/occult beliefs, then that person has no idea what they’re talking about

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I do believe gorilla piss exista.

    I do not believe drinking gorilla piss would grant you gorilla strength (citation needed).

  • Baggie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    To be fair I very much don’t believe in wifi. I use it, but I still think it doesn’t have what it takes.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    “It’s funny how people will believe in Newton’s laws of motion but still think the Force from Star Wars is mythical nonsense.”

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    I don’t need to believe in Wi-Fi I just need to see that my phone is connected to the internet. The existence of Wi-Fi can be inferred by me having access to YouTube.

  • Gladaed@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Destructive dunking is not a constructive way to spread the word of the lord science