Yes that's how I read it, at least. But that's a common result of short comments - unless we write entire essays (which I certainly won't be doing lol), misunderstandings are just gonna happen. I'm sorry you were so stressed out at that time. I've been there, though my coping mechanism is retreating inward, and I hope you don't have to experience that again.
A high level of symbolic overlap between the event and frame of reference and experiences of a person, within a given time frame. The events giving rise to the observed phenomenon and the observer's frame of reference will overlap occasionally. Could use / make an AI tool, but cataloging the observer's frame of reference and the multitude of external stimuli at a given time would seem to be impossible to do accurately. Precognition could be a meaningful form of synchronicity, or be related, but I don't need precognition to know not to open that topic!
it's incredibly interesting. but like gravity i doubt there will ever be an understanding of why/how/what it is. and it doesnt help anything in anyway
I've thought that too.
i think spacetime says there is no upstream. or is that the 8th dimension? something in "Physics" speculates time happens all at once.
I think mathematically it does, but we still experience the arrow of time and entropy. I'm not a math guy, though. There is no barrier to the future affecting the past on some levels, in theory.
I thought the very definition of time was "that thing that stops everything happening all at once"
I thought the very definition of time was "that thing that stops everything happening all at once"
keep it simple, i say.Second sentence is incorrect with current accepted physics. Time is a dimension (the fourth dimension), and the unique part is it flows in one direction. One of the canonical examples is you never see a broken egg put itself together. Time always flows in the same direction. And the predictions for time in General Relativity are currently experimentally validated.
I work in AI/ML as a data scientist and actuary, and it is absolutely not precognition. AI is a complex statistical system, but nothing that goes near precognition. Using probability to predict the next best token is not precognition.
im not saying spacetime is the 8th dimension. i was saying that maybe i am thinking of the 8th dimension, not the 4th.
I love those videos. Look up "hyperbolic space video games" to continue the mind trip.im not saying spacetime is the 8th dimension. i was saying that maybe i am thinking of the 8th dimension, not the 4th.
i was watching a video recently that there are 4d computer games and that is spatially the 4th dimension. so now im confused about the dimensions sequence.
i think the DMV disproves that.
But you can have it look at a particular data set, perhaps for structural stability of a dam or something, and it can see patterns in the data that humans miss, correct?
This 2002 documentary actually does an excellent job of explaining exactly how precognition really works:
I'd expect synchronicity to be defined as "you'll know it when you see it". Basically, the same way UFOs are identified.
I like that movie and will die on that hill
Yes, every statistical model does that. Linear regression, especially with an interaction term, does that. ML/AI are used precisely because they can pick up 1000 5 level interactions in an hour, and those models are built in such a way as to generalize better. I don't even know how long it take me to pick one highly predictive 5-level interaction. And you can do that easily with a random forest and gradient boosted machine. A GBM for example is just a a few hundred or few thousand discussion trees that can so far deep on interactions, it would take a human 1,000 to understand one.
Yep and naturally, I prefer the mundane explanation until I see an experiment, INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED, by others. Caps aren't aimed at you haha; I've just believers post "studies" from the Magic Believers Guild.
I think those writing about synchronicity see it as related but distinct from coincidence. Like coincidence +, in that for it to be a synchronicity it must have an emotional resonance where it feels like the external world is communicating with a latent feeling or thought which momentarily appears like a profound connection. So, yeah, creating a test using a data set of otherwise hidden unconscious thoughts/associations doesn't seem like the easiest thing to study…
I hope that is not a display of precognition!
The version I know of from Reddit HighStrangeness is the total woo, something actually in control version. So I'm enjoying learning the different definitions. Agree on your conclusion.
I am indeed psychic. Please give me money
something sentient you mean?
No, I don't, because you said you "did it" yourself, but at no time in your post did you explain what it was that you actually "did".
That's purely an opinion of yours. I find the notion of a capricious deity that can break the physical laws of nature at will to be a singularly repellent one. And many people may "believe" in it without actually finding any comfort; after all, one doesn't make a conscious decision to believe or disbelieve something, one merely becomes convinced. The fear inherent in religion is damaging to many, and to society as a whole.
Your comment reminded me of Louis C.K.'s take on Mark 11:12-25...
No, it's the ordinate with the time-like property in the differential equations (so it behaves as if it's a spacial dimension that's undergone a Wick rotation, and thus is effectively imaginary, as per Hawking's formulation). It just so happens that everything we encounter day-to-day has only one such ordinate, but hypothetically (mathematically, so we're outside the Popper-approved bounds of science here) there can be more (e.g. Penrose's conformal cyclic cosmology model).I thought the very definition of time was "that thing that stops everything happening all at once"
That's the very scientific definition. My definition was more about "human feels" based on a layman's version of listening to scicom. But based on your definition, what is left unanswered is "why now?" If it's all "one block," what decides this moment as the one we experience?
Or how about, part of them which you communicate to others (while you're still alive) enriches you and continues to "live"?
Special Relativity says there is none. There is a here-and-now, but you only asked for a now.
Thank you. I lost a nephew yesterday, a man younger than my children, so the subject is much on my mind right now. And at my age, my own death is looming, and the same is true for most of my circle of friends. I'm not afraid of being dead, although I don't look forward to pain or disability.
Yeah, I knew that one. Don't you too feel that's an entirely unsatisfying answer?
I'm aware. to be fair, you find lots of things repellent.
I am sorry for that. It is hard when somebody young passes away. You and your family are in my thoughts today.
Yeah, for those of us with "more yesterdays than tomorrows," it's a topic that merits a bit of thought. As I have crossed the threshold where I now attend more funerals than weddings, it has become something I am certainly more aware of!
That made me do a double take. I absolutely understand where you are coming from on that, but my own experience has been so positive and joyful (other than having to go to Sunday School as a kid, which I did not want to do at all!) that I was taken aback a bit, even though it is not a new-to-me nor unexplored concept.
I totally understand. It's on my mind a lot of the time as I get older, too, and my friends die along the way. Such a deal! My Dad's mom who was almost 103, died just last week, and my Dad got back from NY a couple of days ago, having lost his father previously. I'm very sorry to hear about your nephew. I try to tell myself that the individuals I have lost have completed their time on Earth, and I still have to complete mine, to do some kind of good here. Helps a little bit.
