What is "reality"?

[ForgottenSeer 823865]

There are things we ignore, but they are reality.

i don't know how the new NSA kernel exploit is, but im sure it is real.

 

[Andy Ful]

Umbra: if a gigantic tree falls down in the forest and no human hears it, does it still make noise? Does it really fall down? Does it ever actually exist?

There can be some problems, too. Can exist the noise without anything that can perceive the noise? Can something fall down without anything that can see it? Can exist creatures that perceive "the falling down tree" in a totally different way than humans?
Can reality be defined to exists without human-like events like hearing, seeing, smelling, touching, etc.?

 

[bribon77]

i don't know how the new NSA kernel exploit is, but im sure it is real.

For example, for years we didn't know anything about wireless networks, but they were there

 

[Andy Ful]

There are things we ignore, but they are reality.

It is a very reasonable assumption.

 

[Andy Ful]

Hi mlnevese (and all of you), nice to meet you,

If we want to talk about space in general, it is before A, then between A and B, and after B, and also around A and B, and also around 'before, between and after' A and B, so everywhere beyond, without borders. So space has no borders. And is real between A and B and beyond. So beyond is real.

It is not necessarily true in the "Special theory of relativity". The words "before", and "after" can depend on the frame of reference. In one frame the event A can be after B, but in other the B can be after A.

But if we want to talk about the space of the room, we consider only space of this room, in this room, not beyond.

The space of the room has a precise meaning only in classical mechanics. In fact, the walls can vibrate so the space of the room changes in time. Furthermore, some particles inside the room can tunnel via walls and appear outside the room.

Reality it's all that is physically existing, independently of the individual (living: man, animal, plants) perceiving it.
Reality is not created by commenting on it, commenting on the aspects of the material world.

You will have the same problem as in Umbra's definition.
If a physical object is a part o reality, then you define reality by reality (vicious circle).
If physical objects are not parts of reality, then reality is made from not real parts.

What living beings (humans, animals) think = describe is only about reality, a description of reality that exists physically and is independent of the individual perceiving it ....

That may be true, or not depending on the definition of reality (we do not have one so far).

 

[plat]

Reality it's all that is physically existing, independently of the individual (living: man, animal, plants) perceiving it.

Yes. You can relate to this by looking at a star in the night sky. When you look at it, it becomes real to you, maybe for the first time. You identify it as a star based on pre-conceived concepts you learned. But the penultimate reality is that this star's light took billions of years to reach your retinas and in fact may no longer exist.

Too much arrogant human-centricity. Humans don't define reality. It's the other way around.

 

[Prorootect]

When you look at it, it becomes real to you,

No, it's real in our time, reality, independently of me or you looking at it...matter exist independently of you perceiving its existence...

 

[oldschool]

The chair can be a complex physical process... ... but a collection of the particles.

This is

Some people believe that the concrete chair is a part of reality. But, the physicist can say that it is not so easy, because the chair at the moment T1 has usually a different number of atoms than T1 + 1s.

Your statements (as I edited the 1st one above) are very close to the classic Buddhist view of reality. If we try to "find" the "real" chair, the "ultimate" chair, we will be unable to do so because our investigation will only find "parts". These parts in turn will be found to be made of other parts, and so on, ad infinitum. We will be unable finally to find the "real" chair. The real chair does not exist in the least, in any way at all. Nonetheless, any persons perceiving the chair will be able to agree in designating that object as the name "chair" based on its function of allowing one to sit. (Of course each person's mental conception of chair will be different depending on their own karmic dispositions.) The "ultimate" chair, the "real" chair is the mere absence of chair, which is to say that the chair exists only as "mere name". All things "exist" in this way.

Based on this understanding, we can say that there is no objective "reality", but only the person's "karmic" reality, i.e. all the causes and conditions that have brought the person to this moment. I was at lunch with a friend yesterday and told him I was watching the impeachment trial of the U.S. President and he asked why. I said because it was historic, rare and important. He answered that there is no history, i.e. that it is fiction, fantasy, etc. and that none of it mattered. Of course he is correct (because it is simply the collective karma at a moment in time), but so am I!

 

[Prorootect]

If physical objects are not parts of reality, then reality is made from not real parts.

Hmmm what is this sentence, physical objects are ALWAYS part of reality.

 

[Andy Ful]

Hmmm what is this sentence, physical objects are ALWAYS part of reality.

Then your definition is not good. You define reality by reality. It is similar to defining the line as a collection of points, and the point as the crossing of two lines.
Most Quantum physicists will not agree with you that physical objects have to be real.

 

[oldschool]

The words "before", and "after" can depend on the frame of reference. In one frame the event A can be after B, but in other the B can be after A.

There is also the ultimate Buddhist view of the 3 times: the past, present and future. To quote my source*:

"... there are no past things, and no future things; all functioning things are necessarily present. However, there are pasts of things and futures of things; and these are functioning things because they are produced from causes and produce effects. A seed, for example, is a present, but it has a past and future. The past of the seed is the cessation of the seed. Even though this cessation is a past, at the time of the seed it is a future; and when the seed is destroyed it is a present. Thus, the past of the seed is a functioning thing that exists after that seed has ceased. Similarly, the future of a seed is a functioning thing that exists before the seed exists. Before the seed exists, the future of the seed is present, but at the time of the seed it is a past." (italics added)

* Ocean of Nectar, pp.221-222, by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso

 

[Andy Ful]

...
Based on this understanding, we can say that there is no objective "reality", but only the person's "karmic" reality, i.e. all the causes and conditions that have brought the person to this moment.
...

One can use the meaning of reality where the inability of finding the "Ultimate chair" does not mean that it does not exist. Simply, we admit that we may never know some things about reality.
Depending on our meaning of reality there can be "Ultimate" reality (objective reality) and personal "karmic" reality.
There is no contradiction.

 

[Andy Ful]

No, it's real in our time, reality, independently of me or you looking at it...matter exist independently of you perceiving its existence...

It is an assumption too (I like it). In Quantum physics it is not true that matter always exists independently of the observer.

 

[oldschool]

One can use the meaning of reality where the inability of finding the "Ultimate chair" does not mean that it does not exist.

Quite right. I should have added that we know that a chair exists, but only conventionally. It exits and functions as a "thing" but is always changing, even if we cannot perceive this change. However, there is no ultimate chair. The ultimate nature of the chair is its "unfindability". I find it fascinating that science now has some grasp of what has been known for 2,600 years or more.

 

[[correlate]]

The reality is what you truly believe to be real, but in fact, is a kind of real illusion.

Andy Ful
But it is a philosophical answer.

 

[oldschool]

Andy Ful
But it is a philosophical answer.

I would say not simply philosophical, but actually how we function all the time. We are all living our own reality, in a fog which somehow seems clear.

 

[Andy Ful]

Quite right. I should have added that we know that a chair exists, but only conventionally. It exits and functions as a "thing" but is always changing, even if we cannot perceive this change. However, there is no ultimate chair. The ultimate nature of the chair is its "unfindability". I find it fascinating that science now has some grasp of what has been known for 2,600 years or more.

This does not exclude, that "Ultimate chair" exists not conventionally but also objectively, as a kind of interaction between parts of reality: human part and physical (chair atoms) part. Of course, there will be no "Ultimate chair" in this case, without humans (who know the meaning of the chair).
There are probably several consistent meanings of reality.

 

[Andy Ful]

Andy Ful said:
The reality is what you truly believe to be real, but in fact, is a kind of real illusion.

But it is a philosophical answer.

It was a philosophical joke.

 

[Prorootect]

Andy Ful wrote:

It is an assumption too (I like it). In Quantum physics it is not true that matter always exists independently of the observer.

Uhh... "In Quantum physics it is not true that matter always exists independently of the observer."
- Quantum physics (phy-sicks...) "theory" is false and wrong entirely, I think.

Found another good link, on quora.com: Is it possible that quantum mechanics is false/wrong? - Quora
...and this wise man's voice, of Guillermo Schwarz:

Every theory can be replaced with a better theory that explains all phenomena.

In that sense, all theories are wrong.

But the problem with Quantum mechanics is something different: it is theory with no useful predictions. Or said in another way: it can predict the cat is alive and dead at the same time. So, whatever phenomena is discovered in the future, anyone can say "it was predicted by Quantum mechanics". The problem is that QM is not sure about anything, anything is possible and therefore is makes no real predictions. Therefore as a theory it's useless.

There is another problem with QM. It negates 3,000 years of science. It is like a new religion, and it can stop science for 1,000 years too. Specially science always considers observers to be out of the experiment, but QM insists that the observer affects the experiment. That negates science at its core.
Think about this. Newtonian physics was only 200 years old when planes were invented. And there were lots and lots of inventions in between.
QM has 100 years already and absolutely nothing to show as inventions.

There is another problem. Sometimes theories are plain wrong, but they come up with discoveries. Later, new theories have better explanations and bad theories are discarded, but the discovered phenomena remains.
That is the case for the hysteria treatments. Hysteria was the name of a disease, now recognized as a false theory. The solution found for hysteria still remains.
QM has led to no discovery whatsoever. Actually if you read all the questions in Quora, you will see QM is more related to religions rather than science. QM unfortunately is the wrong interpretation of scientific data.

(<-- typos rectified by me, underlining by me)

I sign myself fully under these common sense words.


And another link:
False Alarm: The So-Called ‘Angel Particle’ Is Still a Mystery: on scitechdaily.com: False Alarm: The So-Called ‘Angel Particle’ Is Still a Mystery
"The fact that two laboratories — at Penn State and at Wurzburg — found completely consistent results using a wide variety of device configurations

casts serious doubt on the validity of the theoretically proposed experimental geometry and questions the 2017 claim of observing the angel particle,

” said Moses Chan, Even Pugh Professor Emeritus of Physics at Penn State.

 

[Andy Ful]

Guillermo Schwarz:
The problem is that QM is not sure anout anything, anything is possible and therefore is makes no real predictions. Therefore as a theory ii's useless.
...
QM has 100 years already and absolutely nothing to show as inventions
...
QM has led to no discovery whatsoever.

Not true. Transistors, semiconductors, superconductors, atomic clocks, atomic bomb, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, lasers, microprocessors, graphics cards, computer memory, etc. - all are successful predictions/inventions/discoveries based on Quantum theory. In fact, it is the most predictive & powerful theory we have, so far. Of course, it does not mean that people cannot find out something better in the future.

Dear Guillermo Schwarz, please do not talk/write about things that you do not understand at all.