Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
We affect the universe like a bug affects a car windshield...
We could just be the immature part of an intergalactic race that has major implications to the universe in the future.
But just because we want to have a reason for anything, to justify our actions, doesn´t mean that there is a reason to it. It´s most likely not the case. And if You want to know what the universe wants - probably talk to any stone You find - or any air You breath - or any water. Life here just exists, because it´s possible to have life. Nothing to worry about. Wouldn´t be much different if this was just another rock flying through empty space. Except You want to go that route with afterlife, spiritualism - or that humans or life in general are super important. I mean if You put it the other way around: without "intelligent life" there would be no one - or nothing, which can even think about it. So it wouldn´t matter if the universe is there - or not.
Ch conout the Zeno Effect. It is so weird to think about.
By understanding our consciousness we may unlock the secrets of the universe.
Unfortunately it's a bit beyond my understanding, however. So I'm afraid that I cannot be of any more help here. Although I do believe that the universe is greater in size than us, and thus quite a bit more automagical. If we are a butterfly, the universe is an Aerodactyl.
That's all I can contribute.
Don't be that blonde who asked YHVH to win the lottery but never bought the ticket. Apply your will combined with your intent and then exert your action upon reality. That's all there is to it.
Your question is meaningful and is one that has been pretty hotly debated in physics for quite awhile.
In other words, what I'm saying is that your question is plausible...
Now, on how that would work, it's a bit difficult to say. For one, if it was something like you could suggest, we could never be free from the effect in order to measure it in an unbiased way. If you're in a room full of mirrors, how do you find a visible mirror that doesn't have a reflection of your eyes staring at it? (A separate mirror, I guess.)
I tend to believe that what we experience is not, in fact, "the Universe." It's simply the only way we can experience "the Universe." At some point, our ability to experience the Universe breaks down. We are time-limited consciousnesses. And, if there's one way along a timeline, there must be another... probably. But, we can't experience that and can't switch in mid-stream. Some things can, though... Or, at least appear to do so, though somewhere along the line "causality" demands fulfillment. Why? I dunno, Science doesn't care about "why."
I have some admittedly strange notions, but they're not outside the realm of what various bits and pieces of science-fueled arguments among Big Brain types have. I feel, however, "Science" feels compelled to address certain issues in a way that is not always constructive. Even when Science is busy inventing things that can't be observed or measured, only assumed, it stodgily refuses to budge further.
There's a current fun-time group in Science that is putting forth the notion that everything in the Universe is "conscious." That does not, however, mean that it is the sort of consciousness you and I would think they mean. Their "consciousness" is more of an attribute that defines a thing and fixes it in place and time. In the simplest form, it's a data-set of irreducible variables that are assumed to be intrinsic to the "thing," whatever it is. A rock doesn't know it is a rock, but it does "know" it's values in place and time... Why is this proposed? IMO, to get around certain notions that some may find inconvenient.
Anyway, keep on thinking on. There's nothing wrong with your question on its face and plenty of people with lots of alphabet letters after their name have proposed many similar things.
TLDR: IMO, our time-born consciousness, at least human consciousness, is the filter by which we experience the Universe. That experience is inseparable and unavoidable, yet we can peak a tiny bit behind the curtain. That also, however, does not mean consciousness can not also influence the Universe. After all, if you pick up a glass of water in order to drink it, you're influencing the Universe... :)