Existence exists because it is impossible for mathematics not to exist.
Even in absolute nothingness lies the concept of mathematics.
Reality is this concept.
Mathematics *is* consciousness, brought into being by the very necessity of its existence even in the face of all else being gone.
Nothing actually exists anywhere. No thing is real.
The only reality is that which is brought into being by the necessity of the existence of mathematics even in absolute void.
We are the interplay of mathematics so complex and interwoven that it is the equivalent of what we think of as "thought."
Reality is therefore a dreamlike state of mathematical interplay and development, a dream. A true dream as unreal as any sleeping dream.
Here's the secret: We never are truly awake. We just believe that we are.
We just awaken to the point where our reality is familiar and is rational and logical and makes sense to us and has continuity with our previous experiences and meshes with other consciousnesses' dreams that we are associated with in the overall story we participate in that we call our life.
Reality, waking reality, is merely our most ordered dream which we all share.
We insist it not be magical, we insist it make sense. So it does.
If it failed to meet our definition of reality we would retreat in terror of existential crisis. So it doesn't.
Hence, it's a very realistic dream.
Precisely as realistic as is needed to convince each one of us individually, in fact. That is all it's needed to be.
We are mathematics, which turns out to be consciousness, which turns out to be as real as anything ever gets.
Our next moments in time are generated by the mathematics (the physics) of the previous ones, with all possible results being realized in it's own dimension, or perhaps more accurately, at its own frequency.
A mathematical multiverse.
I wonder if this will make sense tomorrow.
********************
Note: If this concept interests you, you might like to read THIS BOOK
"Our Mathematical Universe" by cosmologist Max Tegmark. Read the editorial reviews on the Amazon page linked above. Note the names of the reviewers. This concept, likely or not, is utterly credible. It just requires a paradigm shift.
FYI: http://googleresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/inceptionism-going-deeper-into-neural.html
ReplyDeleteHey Brian,
ReplyDeleteI've drawn similar conclusions myself through my own Salvia experiences.
Many years ago, I did some deep Salvia exploration where I unlocked my awareness out of my ordinary "frame" of reality. I shifted backwards into a very real "outer layer" of reality which appears to encompass our conventional world.
I paid a great deal of attention to the "threshold" where the conventional world intersects with the outer world. At that intersection point, I was surprised that I could peer into an array of different "frames" of my ordinary reality, all panned out in front of me, and each frame appearing slightly different from the next. It looked as if I could choose which frame I wanted to enter back into, granted it might not be the same one I departed from.
I've come to think that "realities" exist as mathematical sets, where all realities that are highly likely to occur can be grouped together, in that they are stemming from a "branch". There may be vastly many branches and sets, forming a sort of hyperdimensional probability tree.
Brian, when you are perceiving different frames of yourself, perhaps you are viewing a set of "highly likely" realities that are stemming from a specific branch ("your past"). Since those realities all have virtually the same likelihood of occurring, they are interchangeable. You could switch between them effortlessly without any major consequences.
Perhaps Salvia can be used as a tool that enables us to willingly shift in and out of different realities. Maybe we'd find that one particular frame of reality is more desirable than another. Perhaps we could even find a way to explore the most unlikely (and even obscure) branches of reality.
The most puzzling question still remains. If we do accept this model of reality, how does it relate to what present day science leads us to believe about the universe? Maybe we need to challenge our own concept of what is "physical" and "real".
When we are dreaming at night, aren't we convinced that those dreams are actually "real" during the time that we are experiencing them? And when we are engaged in a Salvia trip, isn't that also "real" during the time we are experiencing it? You already know where I'm going with this.
I personally suspect that everything is a dream (even our waking world). No experience is inherently "more real" than another. If you are experiencing it, then it must be real (at least to you, the observer). The physical universe may just be a particular dream that is profoundly consistent and ordered (like you said).
Maybe we can go a few steps further and think of reality as a purely mathematical construct. When this construct is viewed by an observer, it appears animated and "real". Observation is what gives rise to the dream.
The mechanics could boil down to an interplay of wave functions, or maybe a "simulation" running on a quantum computer within a higher world (or even our own future world?). There are so many different ways to look at it, but most of all, I enjoy thinking of reality as a fractal.
A fractal is a simple mathematical formula, but the beauty lies in the complexity that the formula yields.
If an observer were to "traverse" through the fractal of reality (similar to a Mandelbrot zoom video), there could be infinitely different outcomes observed. Each of those outcomes is directly linked to the traversed path ("the past"), and there are always a myriad of future outcomes branching from the present. As the observer continues to forge a path through the fractal, some outcomes will be very closely located, making them all highly likely to be observed, while others will be very distantly located in other branches, making them all highly *unlikely* to be observed.
Anyway, getting tired of typing now haha. Brian, if you do end up reading this, hope you found it interesting!
Dafu, I missed this reply. WOW. I've had the exact same thoughts, even earlier TODAY, because I've sensed my "selves" all forming into groups that seem to be groupings of related realities, related in the sense of similar. So in each grouping it's even possible that my inner reality is an amalgamation of overlapping similar inner realities all 'averaged out' and I'm sensing the average "gist" of all my inner dialogues combined.
ReplyDeleteOh, and you weren't Dafu... my mistake.
ReplyDelete