Messages

Quantum physics is non-intuitive.  The math works, predictions from experiments are confirmed, theories are validated. 

That doesn't mean it makes the same kind of sense that Newtonian physics does.  Things don't make "sense" in the traditional... um... sense.

Maybe we can look at it this way -- the probability field IS.  That's the way it works in QuantumLand.  But to us up here in MacroWorld, it's confusing as hell, and the only word we have for it is "random".

^^^
This is essentially what I was saying in more a more technical and scholarly wording.  It is not truly random, but extremely complex, possibly beyond our comprehension.  Levels of sophisticated physics at extremely microscopic levels are EXTREMELY complex and unpredictable at times.  I'm saying that patterns are capable of become increasingly complex, onward towards infinity, in a way where they will eventually transcend any conscious minds ability to perceive it's mechanics.  Chaos being that asymptote of an infinitely complex model of reality, that is only possibly perceived by a being of infinite IQ, or a godlike entity by definition of the word, omniscient. 

Have you ever seen the documentary "What the Bleep do we Know?".  It talks a lot about quantum mechanics, and also the influence of mind on reality.  For instance, electrons passed through a filter behaved differently depending on whether or not they were being observed while passing through the filter.  The very act of observing, or adding consciousness to the equation, changed the behavior of the electrons.  They also used "hard concentration" on certain outcomes to influence probable outcomes on seemingly random events.  Mind over matter kinda stuff.  It's a fun and interesting watch

I understand your points, and just feel like miscommunication is what's taking place here.

I have already listed a real world example.  Christianity, well known for it's zealots worldwide, is in fact an example of humans acting as the monkeys did, blindly following the rituals and mantras because they were taught them by their predecessors.  Based on my observations of many people in society, not everyone who claims Jesus to be their savior received this information from a "life-changing" revelation as brought to them by an angel in a dream, or while meditating on a sunrise, felt the voice of Jesus Christ guiding them to salvation.  Instead, they simply enjoy the company and acceptance of the other people at Church when they do so.

I know, I know, who gives a shit.  This was meant to be a simple point, a mere statement, that I'm having to draw out to try to communicate effectively, so all in all this argument isn't that meaningful.  "Who gives a shit?"  This sentence in itself is a colloquialism, and those are often adopted by people without thinking about the origin of the statement.  It is common for people who are learning new languages, to not understand the local dialects and colloquialisms, because they are used to communicate meanings that are not literal translations of the phrase.  Colloquialisms are other examples of how people accept behaviors as others, and repeat those behaviors without knowing the origin of the behavior. 

So forget the monkey experiment entirely for a moment.  The message I was trying to communicate is:  "Sometimes people just copy others peoples behavior, without considering other options or understanding the origin of their behavior."  If you don't agree with this, then perhaps you haven't studied psychology or observed human behavior on that level.  Now then, it just so happens, that this is the message that the "monkey experiment meme" was trying to communicate, with a fictional illustration of the behavior as performed by monkeys in a fictional cage with a ladder.  Just because a turtle never raced a hare, doesn't mean that sometimes taking your time is a better way to accomplish a goal than racing through the motions as fast as you can.  If upon discovering that a turtle never raced a hare, a person decided that there's no wisdom in patience and focus because the story wasn't true, they would be limiting themselves.

But honestly, who gives a shit.  Just trying to clearly communicate what I was saying, not trying to say this is very important to understand.

Alright then, should've known that something posted in the form of a meme-image with text on it would be a fabrication on the internet.  But like what the Good Reverend Roger said, it's the message that's more important.  It clearly outlines a behavioral pattern that describes the mutations apparent in many ways of life, such as religions, like Christianity for example, which most likely is barely even recognizable to the people who first practiced esoteric Christian pseudo-Jewish magic stuff.

Mainly, I just think if more people thought about the phenomenon occurring in this "experiment", it would be a good thing for the thinkers out there.  A fable if you will.

It outlines a made-up behavioral pattern.

It's one of those anecdotes that doesn't bear repeating because it's not a real phenomenon.

It's like those "Teachable Moments" that the mommy bloggers make up out of whole cloth to convey a self-righteous image and garner attention.

Not exactly what I meant, but I agree with you on what you said.  I'm not saying that even though the whole thing was fiction, we should treat it like it's real.  I'm saying the fiction paints a picture of a behavior that does actually exist in people.  Much like many fictional movies will make people think about behaviors in themselves they may not have been previously aware of, because they were able to relate to the characters in the movie, and the situations that they found themselves in, how they reacted, etc.  The movie plot should not be treated as fact, but the message in the plot is relevant and helps build perspective.  However, the fact that the "experiment" was posted to trick people does disqualify it as a legitimate fictional art, but that's a different argument. 

So what I meant was, oh well too bad it's fake, but at least it gets the point across about behavior that people actually partake in.  There are truly people out there who simply say "Praise Jesus" because they were taught to do so, even if they have a warped understanding of his teachings.  They may not even believe in him, but just adopted the personality and lifestyle.

Person 1: " Think for yourself!"
Person 2: "Shut up."

This is good enough

Yep.  Me too.

Below the subatomic level, there is nothing but randomness.  This is as readily apparent as the earth being flat by observers around the world!  Until of course, we see around the world.

LOGICAL CHECKMATES!

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "Alright!"
Person 1: "Hmmm..."

both scratch their heads...

Person 1: "Think for Yourself!"
Person 2: "No!"

both scratch their heads...

Indeed.  Much of that was absolute crap and shit.  I was attempting to explain what the shit all of this was, an idea anyways.  You don't have to recognize my idea, in all due fairness, my idea doesn't recognize your criticisms

Ok, well now that we're on that page for a moment, here is something else that is worth a though or two:

For quick briefing, in mathematics, there is a concept of asymptotes, in which a graphed equation will get closer and closer to a line without ever touching it.  I wrote down an idea where Chaos is only an asymptote, nothing is ever truly Random, it just appears random due to the complexity behind it's pattern.  In this writing, I mentioned that Chaos is the asymptote on an order with an INFINITE complexity. 

Absolute crap.  Below the atomic level, you get true random behavior.  That was the whole point of the Schroedinger's cat experiment.

Well, the point of this is, we could be calling it random because we can't perceive an infinite level of complexity, this is something only a god figure could perceive.  Calling something Eris to explain randomness, and anthropomorphizing it as a Goddess, is an example of putting a label on a consciousness that could perceive such an "Order" of infinite possibility.  Infinite possibility, I would dare say, does not contradict randomness.  But now we're just having a terminology debate.  Words are words

Touche

There's really nothing I can do to argue with you on it.  I'm just a mind with this idea, and you're a mind believing that random behavior is truly random.  As long as mysteries exist, all facts are up for grabs

Ok, well now that we're on that page for a moment, here is something else that is worth a though or two:

For quick briefing, in mathematics, there is a concept of asymptotes, in which a graphed equation will get closer and closer to a line without ever touching it.  I wrote down an idea where Chaos is only an asymptote, nothing is ever truly Random, it just appears random due to the complexity behind it's pattern.  In this writing, I mentioned that Chaos is the asymptote on an order with an INFINITE complexity. 

To draw this out with examples some more, a line drawn from Point A to Point B is a pattern of simple complexity, and we can comprehend it with our current IQ's.  A slightly more complicated pattern would be a line from Point A to Point B to ... Point Y to Point Z.  A much more interesting line, yet we can all still see it and understand it.  Pump that complexity up a whole lot more, and you have things like say, a hammer.  It's an arrangement of matter that we use to hammer things, and with a simple demonstration most men and monkeys can understand how to grab and use a hammer.  Increase complexity, and we have automobiles, computers, software designs, and engineering technology.  Now, we're getting into the field where some people understand exactly how these things work, but many of us just understand that they do work on some vague principles, not quite fully comprehending it.  That's not to say that we couldn't learn how it works entirely, but arguably some of those sciences reach a complexity that is beyond certain people's IQ's. 

Now, with this idea rolling, what I'm getting at is, there's no reason to believe that there are patterns of order out there that appear Chaotic simply because they are made from a complexity of patterns beyond our recognition.  And in this theory, True Chaos is the same thing as an Order with Infinite Complexity.  Infinity itself is hard to pin down, therefore not truly taking away from the nature of Chaos.  It just makes one scratch there head when they try to fathom exactly what a pattern of Infinite Complexity would be exactly, is this where ideas such as Choice come into play? Does infinite complexity mean unpredictable?  As in, a pattern that rewrites itself indefinitely? Eventually, I get a headache thinking about what roles thought, choice, awareness, etc play in that theory.

This is, at least, the reason I perceive that most Discordians agree that Eris (Goddess of Chaos) is the ultimate law.

It was good of you to explain who Eris is, otherwise I might have been confused.

:bow: Indeed, I suppose this was mainly aimed at the OP of this discussion, asking what the shit this all was

No worries.  I'm just an asshat.

Me too

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

Well played, sir.

I agree, this is a tricky situation, because the moment I begin trying to answer that, we all become dangerously close to comprehending the thing I'm explaining as incomprehensible.  Perhaps the better way to make that point, is to say that there is always a possible reality that contradicts our perception of reality while simultaneously explaining why we perceive what we perceive as real.  For my typical over-referenced analogy that illustrates this, The Matrix film is a concept where our very thoughts are information fed to us from an external source. 

Another example could be, the logical checkmates we run into with science, such as the unsolved mysteries in atomic theory, the even more confusing situations in quantum theory, and things that seem to operate on pure chaos but are most likely just an extremely complicated order that is, well, beyond our comprehension...such as the behavioral patterns of a lightening bolt.  We know it's (for the most part) that it's a passing of positive to negative charges in the environment, but is there an explanation to the shape of the lightening bolt itself? Is it just the artwork of the Universe? Why a jagged line instead of a curvy line?

Another example would be the logic behind the pattern of black and white pixels on a television with no signal.  We call it snow, and accept that definition and nobody really cares much about what TV snow is, but is there a logic behind the rapid black and white, on and off nature of all those pixels? I know it can be traced to 1's and 0's of electricity, but why that precise pattern of randomness, instead of say, a different pattern of randomness?  The pattern that we witness from a TV with no signal can in fact be described and explained by an intelligence of some kind, but where's that map at? 

This is, at least, the reason I perceive that most Discordians agree that Eris (Goddess of Chaos) is the ultimate law.

It was good of you to explain who Eris is, otherwise I might have been confused.

:bow: Indeed, I suppose this was mainly aimed at the OP of this discussion, asking what the shit this all was

Alright then, should've known that something posted in the form of a meme-image with text on it would be a fabrication on the internet.  But like what the Good Reverend Roger said, it's the message that's more important.  It clearly outlines a behavioral pattern that describes the mutations apparent in many ways of life, such as religions, like Christianity for example, which most likely is barely even recognizable to the people who first practiced esoteric Christian pseudo-Jewish magic stuff.

Mainly, I just think if more people thought about the phenomenon occurring in this "experiment", it would be a good thing for the thinkers out there.  A fable if you will.

I have a feeling many of you will enjoy this:

http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2014/03/the-experiment.html?m=1

I'm no pope, but I've read Principia Discordia once as a philosophy student, and then read it again recently when I was more into spirituality and magical phenomenon.  The book served as an excellent read when I was in both states of mind.  It has a light-hearted, yet powerful effect when read as a philosophy for ontological purposes.  And similarly it serves as an excellent guide to people exploring consciousness in both the psychedelic and magical/spiritual side of things.

A fundamental thing to focus on, is that there isn't really many fundamental things to focus on.  To say that there is something that is "Correct" and it is up to us to continually explain how correct it is, is insanity.  All we truly know, is that we are here trying to figure out why we're here.  We are simply parts of the Universe, and we are trying to discover the origins of the Universe, so therefore, one could say, that the Universe is trying to discover itself.  Thus, it may not be entirely absurd to say, that if you focus on discovering your true heart, rather than listening to everybody else as far as the "Correct" way to be, then maybe you're doing the Universe a favor.  This is, at least, the reason I perceive that most Discordians agree that Eris (Goddess of Chaos) is the ultimate law.  A law of lawlessness cannot be thrown.

Also, don't let me tell you what this is about.  I was simply sharing a cup of coffee with you just then.  There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.