Fun things to think about


Temporal Novice
I've read through quite a bit here and I've decided I like you guys.

I don't know any of you personally, but the posts here share the image of a community expressly interested in curiosity. Passersby wander in and out based on their intentions, but there's a consistent and unyielding want to learn things that generally chases off those who never had any intention to provide to begin with. I've grown fond of this place and the characters here. In a world where so much is buried by ruthless self importance, the only expectation one is left with here is that there is more out there and it is worth waiting for.

I found this place by chance in a way, but knowledge of it has accompanied me so far pleasantly.

I find you all terribly genuine. Even in the sense that looking back on your posts from an imagined future point in time they still seem to convey that humble sense of un-knowing and willingness to wonder that so rarely befits the competitive world we exist in today.

That said, I'm sorry I haven't contributed anything genuine myself. I don't have much though, but I do occasionally have ponderous thoughts that roll back and forth in my head.

So, here's some fun things to think about.

It was proven some time ago over numerous studies that human observation influences reality, if I recall one experiment correctly they validated that the odds of successful pachinko machine results could be influenced by a user as opposed to running by itself unobserved. Maybe you saw that special too.

In a different and largely unrelated study they were able to prove that humans being exposed to randomized visual images had their skin tense up a split second before they were shown images of a sexual or violent nature, especially where blood or nudity was present.

The half life of certain subatomic particles is halved by mere observation. The start of this effect is considered instantaneous at the moment. What, however, does this imply for observing the light of stars billions of miles away?

More recent studies over the last decade have suggested that erasing or destroying the data provided by a quantum waveform (in the explicitly small time period in which the waveform can be reversed to a collapse) undoes any additional collapses associated with that entangled wave. (Long short, you observing a thing influences everything that thing came into contact with, but removing the evidence you observed it undoes the associated changes that it would have caused other objects).

Quantum theory delves exclusively in the nature of objects too small to practically observe. A common theme in quantum mechanics is that you can know the immediate speed or position of a quantum object. If you measure it's speed, you can only ever know how fast it was going by. If you measure its location, you have to hit it with something that would inevitably change it's location and speed. These ideas seem trivial until you consider that they make up the observable universe. What then can one suggest about macroscopic quantum structures?

A few years ago they proved that light within a quarts cube could be refracted into and out of a cube of the same material when forced to entangle by the way of wave entanglement with a laser.

If a macroscopic quantum structure exists in multiple states by way of entanglement of wave phenomenon, how would its apparent entanglement influence the macroscopic structure's apparent deterministic realities?

If the mind is capable of picking up events before they occur for the sake of safety and procreation, how does this influence it's decision making?

If the mind is capable of picking up events before they occur, as may or may not be the case for poor souls who occasionally dream the future by accident or self fulfilling prophecy, does that imply the event is unavoidable?

If the event is unavoidable, does that mean it has already occurred?

If the event is avoidable, does that imply it could never be and therefor ought to be undetectable?

If there are multiple states of self influenced by a macroscopic waveform entanglement, is the self something that can be divided?

Is an arm a leg?

Are either of those a person?

Is hunger a person?

Is your greed a person?

Is your sleepiness a person?

What is a person, in macroscopic quantum logic? If they can exist over multiple states influenced potentially by waveforms that entangle them with information that they have yet to stumble upon, but will become imperative for survival's sake, how will those states influence the supposed deterministic reality that this individual now faces over his variable states?

If one could create a device capable of associating these variable states with a single structure they could all interact with, would this device then produce irregular or indeterministic results based on which variable interacted with it within a specific timeframe?

Could other variables, or the aspects of the person that do not wholly qualify as a person, notice that and interact with it beyond their previously inert scope of self awareness?

If one could find the appropriate materials, could he then assume awareness through his variables of consequences he never experienced?

If through this leap of logic, could on begin to see some subtle trends in the function of time and space over variable realities that began to suggest that none of them are so invariable as to eventually be touched or interacted with by another?

Also, what if bigfoot was real.

Fun stuff to think about.