Very rarely I've experienced weird sensations that I can't fully describe but they still leave a brief impact on my subconscious. Perhaps it's that my thoughts beforehand are unusual and this feeds back into my perception. For example in early 2021 I was going for a walk by the lake and started thinking about the ground being inclined upwards so as to produce gravity. I then relaxed and bought an ice-cream in a shop. But as I walked back I suddenly began to focus on the walking postures of people nearby. The way they swung their arms suddenly looked extremely complicated. In fact it seemed so fine-tuned that an apparent mismatch began to appear with their ordinary level of mental focus and they were almost walking robotically. It was as if they were using their arms to glide up and down. I felt this unsettled and kind of mystical sensation in the back of my mind. I managed to wait it out and overcome it by continuing on my stroll and changing my thought line. It was as if my subconscious was experimenting with a different interpretation of my perception.

Misotheism: "a hatred of God."

It's possible to distort any worldview which includes pantheism but nonetheless pantheism can offer another antidote to misotheism. Hating God under pantheism would be an equivocation since it'd essentially be equivalent to hating every other person along with yourself. In a pantheistic framework a misotheist would therefore be closely related to a misanthropist. Misotheism has always been a risk when people feel betrayed by life circumstances. It applies on a collective level too such as how Germany with such a rich Christian history still managed to instigate two world wars. It shows that introducing a personal God into the equation runs the risk of creating a love/hate relationship for those who are uncertain in their faith. A contradiction for any evil people who distort misotheism into misanthropy is that such an "evil God" wouldn't care about the victims. As such committing crimes is never a logical form of revenge against God.

It might be ironic but a possible benefit of anti-realism is hyper-materialism. Anti-realism and materialism are often opposites but sometimes they might concur. For example anti-realism is capable of objectifying the brain simply because such a standpoint isn't reliant on the neurons to produce consciousness. Certain versions of anti-realism can view light as being conscious instead and so it can interpret the brain as a physical object by means of metaphysical dissociation. This would be handy not only for spiritual and philosophical reasons but also for neuro-scientific and psychological purposes. Viewing the brain as a telephone would be a form of temporal dualism where the spatial realm is the same but the timelines are different. It'd mean we could pursue research in neuroscience wholeheartedly without being hesitant about how neurons produce mental experiences. Anti-realism and materialism clashes when it comes to perception where a materialist would say our perception is physical. Yet the inherent strangeness of anti-realism could benefit our capacity to use quantum physics because we'd no longer have to be bogged down by questions of how random atoms combine to form the classical world. In other words anti-realism isn't reliant on the universe making sense in the same way that a dream can be irrational. Some people can have amazing feats of photographic memory and this might be genetic or learned but it could also be a metaphysical ability to dissociate yourself from your memory and view yourself more deterministically. An anti-realist is capable of bouts of super determinism simply because free will can be interpreted as a temporary phenomenon when viewed through the anarchy of sleep. So short spells of determinism doesn't necessarily contradict anti-realism and so anti-realism could enhance our ability to maximise empathy and memory. Overall antirealism offers us alternatives such that we'd have the spiritual independence to pursue physicalist logic to an extreme.

If my mind is equivalent to the light I see and your mind is equivalent to the light you see where our colour perceptions are separate, then it'd be like your mind is traveling faster than the light I see. I can only detect light in my direction and the light another person sees is always in a different direction to my locus of consciousness. Even if we swapped places and I were to assume the same visual position you had a minute ago we'd still be seeing distinct colours. Maybe photons don't have relative speeds to other photons but if my mind is made of photons then the collections of photons can move relative to the collection of photons that would comprise your mind. So the red that you see would be like a tachyon to the red that I see. In other words I'd never see the same light you see.


https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/light-in-opposite-directions.67852/
"In every inertial reference frame, each photon's velocity is exactly c. Photons do not have their own rest frame (any attempt to create one would violate the postulate that the laws of physics should work the same way in all inertial reference frames), so asking what the velocity of the photons is "relative to each other" is not physically meaningful--asking what B's velocity is relative to A is just another way of asking what the velocity of B is in A's rest frame. You can ask how fast the distance between them is increasing in a particular inertial reference frame, and the answer will indeed be that it's increasing at 2c, but the light-speed limit only applies to things like particles and information, it doesn't apply to concepts like "the distance between two objects"."

Perhaps our minds each have a different "rest frame" to allow for free will.

Iron Giant fight scene

We say that extreme complexity is correlated with consciousness but it's not immediately apparent how turning a human-sized robot into a giant would ever affect its insentience despite an increase in complexity.

Simply walking around or moving our torso can create enough relative motions in our vision to work out how size varies with depth.

One challenge for anti-realism how to reconcile an immense sight like a mountain range as being visually internal. We usually don't have any problem with looking at a photo of New York's skyline and interpreting the image as a 2D screen. It'd be slightly trickier to view the skyscrapers in real life and think of all of the phosphenes as belonging to a flat screen in the brain. Philosophers have no problem with viewing the rooms they're in as non-real but it's a different story trying to "internalise" a mighty building. We're so used to dissociating ourselves from what we see that it'd be socially awkward to reinterpret your perception. You'd be absorbing your surroundings in a literal sense! Sometimes it takes a non-real interpretation a few weeks to spiral into your awareness. For example I find myself thinking more instinctively about apparent floor height after casually remarking on it a few months ago.

The orbit of an asteroid around the Sun is circular and so the upward or downward components would also be circular. We could use an analogy of a roller-coaster where a person on a train going around a tight, inward, semi-circular, concave, horizontal bend could throw a ball at the beginning of the bend and catch it on the other side of the bend. This would still require a lot of skill and lucky timing on the part of the thrower!

Euler Force Examples:

Let's go back to the analogy of the rotating asteroid. For the sake of simplicity we'll just assume that it had a rectangular cuboid shape where it was rotating clockwise about a point. The length and breadth of the asteroid were large but the height from the top surface to the bottom surface was thin. We'll also ignore the orbit of the asteroid around the Sun. An astronaut not too far away from the top left edge of the asteroid who throws a rock sideways further to the left near the cliff beneath them will see the rock appear to fall diagonally downwards relative to their sightline. This is due to the rising centripetal acceleration of the radius where the speed of the asteroid's superficial plane is varied with the outer circumferences moving faster than the inner circumferences. Centripetal force is perpendicular to circular motion and so the rock won't preserve all of the rotational momentum of the asteroid. The slower the overall asteroid rotates, the milder the downward angle will be where it will have a stronger sideways vector from the force of your throw. The faster the outer edges of the asteroid rotates, the steeper the rock will fall to the ground because the centripetal speed of the asteroid's floor will increasingly outweigh the sideways vector from your throw. If the asteroid rotated at an extreme speed then the sideways vector will be negligible in comparison where it'd seem to drop vertically downwards.


Let's asteroid-hop to one with a small oval shape that's also moving clockwise. This time you were standing on the underside of the asteroid. You were placed towards the left again except now you're only half-way to the steep outer edge. So when you throw a rock further to the left in a horizontal direction we'll need something else to happen since both you and the floor would be moving away from the rock with the rock possibly appearing to go higher and higher into outer space. However there's a steep incline on the plane with an average downward chord of -30 degrees returning rightwards to the centre point owing to the oval shape. Thus when you throw the ball to the left, the ground behind you to the right will be higher than your position if your vision reorients itself to see the light reflected off the bottom of the asteroid as being upwards*. For the sake of argument, let's further assume that the asteroid is in an orbit around the Sun such that entire asteroid is still moving leftwards while it also rotates clockwise about a point. The trajectory of the thrown rock is now considered in absolute space with the Solar System instead of it being relative to the surface of the asteroid alone. Owing to the leftwards orbit around the Sun, the higher ground behind you which is also moving leftwards will move even faster when both velocities are combined. However the same ground in front of you (radial length of the asteroid in a 7 o'clock angle) that already appears to be sloping (due to the oval shape) diagonally downhill will slowly begin to move in unison vertically downwards (reversed vision where it'd be upwards for an outside observer) as it crosses (with the rest of the radius) over the x-axis (9 o'clock position) where the clockwise motion of the asteroid will then be going in the opposite direction (upwards and rightwards from 10 to 11 o'clock) compared to its leftwards orbit around the Sun. This time the two velocities oppose each other resulting in a smaller net velocity. Therefore the ground behind you will actually be moving mostly horizontally forwards more than the height direction in absolute space and whack into the thrown rock. The faster the oval asteroid rotates around the Sun, the greater the degree to which the rock will fall straight backwards which is rightwards relative to the asteroid's midpoint even if your initial throw was leftwards. The slower the asteroid orbits the Sun, the longer it will take for the rock to hit the floor. In this scenario the same leftward clockwise motion (7 o'clock position) might seem to have slightly increased relative to the speed of the leftward orbit in the Solar System. Moreover the ground in front of you is objectively moving faster only in terms of the clockwise rotation due to the increased length of the radius. The rock might remain travelling in the leftwards trajectory after you throw it and land diagonally downwards if the orbit of the asteroid around the Sun has a slight upwards vector in addition to its predominantly leftwards orbit. In other words the asteroid could pivot downwards and upwards around the thrown rock with the rock appearing to move in a semi-circular path to the ground in front of you. If there's no upward trajectory on the asteroid's orbit around the Sun, then the rock throw which was originally attempted to be leftwards at slow speed will visibly keep going diagonally backwards and upwards until it eventually crashes really far back rightwards towards the midpoint or even near the right edge on the opposite end. (Anyone who's confused could instead imagine the diametrical opposite with you on the top surface of an asteroid balanced in a 1 o'clock position moving downwards to 4 o'clock as rotates about the midpoint where the asteroid also assumes a rightwards and downwards orbit around the Sun. If you're also puzzled by the inverted vision example then you could think of a ball machine throwing the ball where you're standing the right way up on a nearby spaceship.)



* "Under normal circumstances, an inverted image is formed on the retina of the eye. With the help of upside down goggles, the image on the retina of the observer's eyes is turned back (straightened) and thus the space around the observer looks upside down."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upside_down_goggles


I think I'm owed an award of some kind:

Father Ted Acceptance speech

A possible counter-argument to gravity as a Euler force is that satellites remain in orbit even though there's no atmosphere to affect it and there couldn't be perpetual motion acting on such a short-lived device. One could argue that a satellite is held in place by the initial conditions of the launch. Perhaps the rotating surface of the Earth during lift-off and the wind resistance throughout its ascent until it reaches outer space conspire to add a hidden sideways component to its velocity. According to Newtons first law the satellite will remain at constant velocity whereby it'd maintain its trajectory even without an active force.

Dualism doesn't always have to include the brain being conscious. For example we could rephrase the mind-body problem as the mind-matter problem. If we left out the brain as being non-sentient and robotic then we could focus on other physical substances like photons and chemicals to see how they impact our out-of-body conscious perception.

So I'll ask you again, what exactly is the point of all this? It sounds like mental masturbation and nothing more. — Darkneos

If we were to forget about gravity then your natural tendency would be to stay still since there's no external force according to Newton's first law. You wouldn't fall down into empty space. Therefore we could interpret gravity to be like the surface of the Earth dragging you along with it.

If planets were kept in place by perpetual motion whereby loose asteroids passively escaped the solar system then it wouldn't matter that stars in the out parts of the galaxies are travelling faster than expected. Thus it wouldn't require as much "Dark Matter" to account for the extra energy.

Newton solved gravity by uniting the force on Earth with the force between planets in the solar system. We were then left with hundreds of years trying to reconcile gravity with electromagnetism. Perhaps going back to basics and analysing what would happen if the force between planets and the force attaching us to the ground might actually be separate in nature; perpetual motion and a Euler force respectively.

We've to remember that according to Einstein space is relative and so the up and down directions don't exist without presupposing gravity is already in operation. Therefore it wouldn't matter what direction the Earth was rotating in so as to tie you down. Viewing gravity as a Euler force would mean that action at a distance wouldn't be required as a causal mechanism for gravity.

Imagining gravity as a Euler force would be like the ground literally met the sky at the horizon.

I once experimented with altering the velocity formulas where I measured seconds per metre rather than the usual metres per second. In this case length would be unchanging and somehow all objects would move by time contraction or dilation. Trying to use acceleration as seconds squared per metre utterly dazed me. I kind of inverted everything but it became too confusing for me because it'd require that all physical objects have separate timelines.

"(For) uniform acceleration we have three equations: v = u + at, s = ut + 1/2 at2, v2 = u2 + 2as".
https://owlcation.com/stem/Force-Weight-Newtons-Velocity-and-Mass

Sadomasochism: "the derivation of sexual gratification from the infliction of physical pain or humiliation either on another person or on oneself".

Is it possible that an evil person might freely choose to live in hell after death without being forced to by God if the punishment wasn't everlasting? Performing evil actions on others objectifies not only the victims but also the perpetrators to some extent. Evil violates the qualities of humanness. If heaven and hell are believed to exist then its inhabitants will be much older than the oldest people alive on Earth. Therefore their subconscious will be much wiser and stronger than it was during life. The unconscious minds of evil individuals might hold them to task for their own desires. Free of the symbolism of social status and power hierarchies in our mundane world it might be possible that evil spirits will embrace masochism as much as sadism in a dissociated state of consciousness after death. The notions of heaven and hell have been imprinted on our neurological genetics since the creations of the oldest religions thousands of years ago. Thus even an evil individual might not be able to 100% eradicate their unconscious beliefs in spiritual justice. In other words their own unconscious might retain traces of divine punishment for bad behaviour even if they consciously rebel against it during their earthly life.

"(A) debate is happening between those who believe in an afterlife of torment and those who believe the souls of those who do not enter Heaven will be destroyed."
https://the1a.org/segments/2019-01-08-hell-and-how-we-think-of-it/
To what extent is eternal oblivion less vengeful of a punishment than a temporary stay in hell?

Take the musical instruments a musician is familiar with. They often can hear things in a song the average person who doesn't play those instruments is unaware of. — Marchesk

A dream could function just like the way music rejigs our time perception. Each instrument has a different flow of time. The emotional tone of a dream can be played at a different rate to the thoughts behind a dream. We continuously forget what we intended to do where our dream character moves around and is forced to create new intentions based on the changing locations of the dream. For example a dream character might go to the shop to buy a specific item but it will be forgotten by the time he arrives. Then the dream character must form a new plan based on his current surroundings in the shop. Perhaps he might decide to explore outside. So new plans would be created impromptu. We aren't making new decisions from scratch but instead we're basing them on the changing scenery around us. In a dream we're amnesiac not only about our past selves but also our past ambitions. This is what contributes to effortless story-making. Amnesia in real-life might cause apathy, blankness, confusion or meditation on the present moment whereas amnesia in a dream somehow results in chaotic narratives. One way to explain the mismatch is that we're selectively amnesiac in a dream where our thoughts and emotions diverge. Specific thoughts are erased from a dream character's memory. We're partially amnesiac in a dream rather than being completely memoryless and so the amnesia in a dream is more multi-layered than medical amnesia.

"The spatial and temporal dimensions of music are actually quite separate from the space and time as we encounter them in normal experience. So it's a curious thing that you can write music out and then when pitch goes up you write the notes going up and down and so on. But in fact of course the notes being written are spatially going up and down but the musical notes are not. The tones are not. One way of putting this to say music has its own space and similarly with time. You take a piece of music and you start at 10 a.m - let's say you finish it at 10:15 - and then you think oh I really like that so you play it again. You started at 10:20. Now the start of it in the world of experience is a different time but the start of the piece is the start of the piece. So the temporal relations - start middle finish - and so on plus more sophisticated things like reprise and recapitulation and variations these are all within music" (4:29-5:42)

Gordon Graham - What is Philosophy of Art? - Closer To Truth

"Author defined time as an objective time of the musical composition and the subjective time as psychological experience. Accordingly, absolute time is organized within the composition – it is objective and defined, thus can be expressed in size by the properties, values and symbols of musical elements, notation and timing. Musical time as the psychological phenomena is relative referring to the organization of time in performer's mind, as well as how the performance is perceived and experienced by listeners. The nature of organization of elements of musical time in the performer's mind lies in the conception of the structure of the temporal organization generated by the performer's subjective expression, knowledge of the musical form, and motor/kinesthetic ability. Furthermore, the idea of the temporal structure also incorporates experience and practice, as well as intuition and aesthetic valuations. Thus, the structure of time is not independent – it interacts and relies upon other structures, building performer's conception of the whole."
https://accelerandobjmd.weebly.com/issue3/the-perception-and-organization-of-time-in-music

I often find dreams with a theme of outer space to be really mystical. For example someone could have a dream where they're floating between stars. Then when you awaken it almost feels like your perception of the night sky is internal.

If every neuron has been damaged at least once throughout the entire history and catalogue of brain injuries, then consciousness can't be dependent on any solitary neuron.

If consciousness is fundamental then it might be computationally simpler for evolution to create a conscious being rather than a philosophical zombie. Evolution will choose the most efficient operating system so to speak. However we know that the brain is one of the most convoluted computers in the universe which would appear to serve as contradictory evidence. Perhaps we could say that if consciousness were a total mystery then there might be ways that the mind is actually easier to construct for a biological organism if only we had a more complete theory of computation. For example a new maths chapter always looks intimidatingly complicated but when you study it then it becomes quite intuitive. Perhaps future generations might be able to say the same about the brain once they get their heads around the hard problem of consciousness. The complexity of the brain would then be an illusion akin to the chaotic residue of conscious decision-making. If a computer could find a way to tap into conscious energy then maybe the development of a conscious being might be quite straightforward. For instance the brain becomes more complex when a child grows into an adult. However it doesn't change into a drastically unrecognisable form even though the mindset of an adult is unrecognisable to the mind of a child. In other words the mind changes more than the brain when we grow older. By contrast a computer might have to totally reconfigure the hardware in order to double the capacity of the software.

"90% of Brain Growth Happens Before Kindergarten"
https://www.firstthingsfirst.org/early-childhood-matters/brain-development/

https://www.closertotruth.com/series/consciousness-fundamental

I sometimes make these embarrassing arithmetic mistakes where I don't know whether to include the first or last item. For instance I was on an internet thread where my first post was 127 and then there were two other posters. Therefore I momentarily thought my second post would be number 129 since 7+2=9. However to my surprise it was post 130. This is because it's the third post after when you exclude my first post. Or else how 6+4 is 10 even though 6 to 10 contains 5 separate numbers when you include the number 6. I often made the same mistake when I used the printer where I'd try to predict the pages only to find that I'd come out wrong. There can be a slight discrepancy when we translate pure maths into real life intuition! The equations are watertight but it's up to us to first form those equations! For example it’s counterintuitive how the 18th century is for the 1700s and not the 1800s!

Numb - OFFICIAL TRAILER

An interesting movie about feeling detached from life. When we're knocked off our intended path or fail certain ambitions in life and are left confused about our future then it's probably possible to feel separated from any aspect of ourselves; be it our past memories, our awareness of other people, our own emotions or even our time perception.

Yet another version of anti-realism could be that empty space is 3D and objects are 2D. In this frame of mind objects in our vision would be separated from each other by real space, floor depth and air even though the objects themselves would have no internal depth. Therefore perspective of faraway objects could be reduced in that a reduction in surface area would be offset by the lack of internal volume. A simile for this idea would be that light moves like it were traversing through three dimensions while each solid object we see is like a separate 2D hologram. Our consciousness would extend outwards ever so slightly in our visual perception to create a hollow sense of depth.

Nature worship isn't always reflected in religion directly but the environment can still serve as small incentive for spiritual enthusiasm. Tibetan meditation must be a lot easier to focus on when the icy peaks of the Himalayas serve as the background. The Mediterranean sun lends itself well to a quiet and humble lifestyle while the pleasant forest scenery might make it tempting to transcend yourself. The endless rain of temperate climates is like a mandatory period of penance for those who have to shiver in wet clothes! The magnificent sandstorms and mesmerising desert climate of Arabia would suit the intensity of their religious devotion. The diverse vegetation and extreme weather changes in India might help to foster the multifaceted ways Hindus celebrate their religion. The pandemonium and anarchy of the Amazon rainforest sets the stage for mystical beliefs of native shamans.

How do drugs affect our emotions? A drug like alcohol is more than a placebo in that it has an intense and immediate effect on our state of mind. Alcohol might relax our muscles and so maybe the relaxed muscles would subconsciously remind us of previous times the muscles had the same tone. That way a drug doesn't have to directly affect our emotions. It could do so by altering our memory. For example decaffeinated coffee doesn't contain the drug that helps us stay alert but it can nonetheless be associated with decreased sleepiness if it's taken too late. This might be because the mere taste of coffee by itself can still trigger memories of an alert state of mind from previous caffeine intakes.

Ion: "an atom or molecule with a net electric charge due to the loss or gain of one or more electrons."

Not only are biological cells made of chemicals but any ion is inherently quantum mechanical in that the charge relates to a quantum mechanical electron. For instance ions are used in photosynthesis in plants.

"To replace the electron in the reaction center, a molecule of water is split. This splitting releases an electron and results in the formation of oxygen (O2) and hydrogen ions (H+) in the thylakoid space. Technically, each breaking of a water molecule releases a pair of electrons, and therefore can replace two donated electrons."
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-nmbiology1/chapter/the-light-dependent-reactions-of-photosynthesis/

One way to think of it is that when we close our eyes we see dark phosphenes and that when we open our eyelids we see the exact same phosphenes except that they're instantly rearranged by the incoming photon signals. Black contains all colours. To change our gaze to different objects we can alter the colours we choose to focus on rather than simply their shapes.

"Rather than simply sending single photons toward a volunteer’s eye through either the left or the right fiber, the idea is to send photons in a quantum superposition of effectively traversing both fibers at once. Will humans see any difference?"
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-human-eye-could-help-test-quantum-mechanics/

The photons we see with our eyes are quantum entities and the tactile sense is ultimately based on innumerable collections of atoms. Therefore our perception of the world has quantum components to it which then gets translated into nerve impulses. Even if the nerve impulses deep in the brain don't display quantum superpositions it's still the case that the very first impulse from the sense organ was quantum mechanical in some way. Our retinas must be able to distinguish between the different wavelengths of photons.

"We don't actually have any experimental evidence that relevant quantum superpositions are involved in decision making in the brain. They may be but we've got no um evidence. That's a controversy whether something at the quantum level really has any impact and most of my neuroscience friends would say that to talk about the quantum events is such an order of magnitudes different than what happens at the core of of brain activity which is the neuron that (it )doesn't make sense. I actually have a different issue that if quantum is involved quantum is more of a random process and randomness doesn't seem like free will any more than determinism seems like free will. If quantum processes are relevant in decision making which some people have postulated, (then) we don't at the moment know what those processes are and we don't have any account or very much data.

I don't think about what they would be but let's just suppose for the sake of discussion that new and better empirical evidence comes along one day. How would that help with free will? Well you might say the fact that this quantum indeterminism means that (there) could be... If you replace a sort of previous 19th century rigid determinism; if you were to say that this excluded free will which not everybody would say but if you did say that and then you said ah we're now going to replace that with quantum randomness (then) that might make me freer but i don't think it makes me any more responsible. So it doesn't help with this aspect of responsibility. So I have to admit that I believe in the bottom of my soul that i am responsible for my choices and that's how i live my life."
Andrew Briggs - Physics of Free Will

There is a subtle difference in energy and vibe between the times of each morning mass and the evening masses. I remember going to a dawn mass for Easter Sunday a few years ago where it concluded in an old cemetery as the night turned to day. The night has its own spiritual symbolism in terms of the starlight and the quietness which makes a night mass feel almost shamanic. The early morning masses are quick and efficient which is a continuation of the early bird mindset. The midday masses are the longest since that's the time of the day where we're at our most attentive. Altered daylight levels can thus have a small background effect on the spirituality a mass exudes.

"Science currently knows of no causal mechanism or connection whatsoever that explains how firing neurons cause conscious experiences, or vice versa. For example, how does a network of firing neurons cause our experience of the color red, or the taste of chocolate? No one knows."
https://www.thymindoman.com/the-mysticism-of-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness/

Why do we find sweets sweet? One reason might be because a strawberry jelly isn't actually as sweet as a strawberry itself. A strawberry is very sweet and sugary but we don't find it as consistently tasty because the strawberry is sweet to a fault such that it's actually a bit sharp. So by reducing the extreme sweetness of a strawberry fruit, the jelly will make it less intense and therefore less sharp and easier to focus on. I remember eating pineapple and thinking that the fruit is really sweeter than any sweet but it was actually so sweet that it had a difficult and overwhelming aftertaste. I had to take my time eating it where I took a little break after each bite. Other examples would be how slightly reddish blackberries can sometimes taste sweeter than ripe ones and how older milk can taste creamier than a fresh carton. We enjoy granulated sugar added to desserts but eating a spoon of sugar by itself is too repetitive and dry; it's as if the sugar counteracts the extreme taste of certain foods to make them more familiar. I once got vegetable-flavoured jellies and found them to be a milder and more tolerable taste than the vegetables themselves even though I didn't find them sweet in a traditional sense. Another time I over-indulged at a vending machine by buying a big packet of highly-sugared sour strings and it would've been inedible had the sugar not opposed the sour interior which almost made me squeal. It's strange that I can eat melted cheese or really plain cheese and yet I dislike any intense-flavoured cheese; the constituent nutrients are similar but the taste isn't where a little ingredient can make all the difference. If taste itself is conscious and unreal then we could say the more we can focus on the taste the more pleasurable it will be since the sensation is unquantifiable. When we feel full we become distracted by our stomach and abdominal heaviness where we can no longer fully concentrate on the taste. This is why mindfulness retreats can emphasise eating basic foods like porridge very slowly so that we can appreciate the sweetness of a mundane and healthy cereal. Chocolate is actually a very repetitive taste where all the different brands don't taste as different from each other compared to the world of difference in taste between an apple and an orange. We could say that the boring taste of chocolate is surprisingly tasty in that it's easier to digest than the monotonous taste of healthier food like potatoes. So it's possible that chocolate could inoculate us to more filling foods even though it'd be healthiest not to need the chocolate in the first place.

If our view of the ground is obstructed we can still use the slope of the floor in front of us to project in our imagination how far it'd take for the slope to reach the height of the object in the distance if we know both are on the same horizontal ground level.

Further objects are seen as higher than closer objects even if they're on level ground due to the apparent rise of the ground when it's viewed from head height. The ground would appear to rise in all directions around you when it's interpreted like a 2D screen. When you look down a hill, the bottom of it will still be higher than the ground in front of you relative to the lower part of the eye.


Nadal vs Djokovic - Roland Garros (French Open 2012) - Long Rally

(Nadal in red will be seen as being higher than Djokovic on the TV screen due to the raised camera angle where the court would appear to be slanting downwards.)

If our visual perception was oriented more in one half of the brain than the other, it'd still have to be projected to our conscious mind in a way that's perpendicular so that the curved viewing experience isn't deteriorating on one side faster than the other.

"To cut right to the chase: the viewing experience that you have with a curved television isn't much different from what you're used to. Rtings states that you only notice the outer curve when you're watching TV from an angle. The image quality deteriorates faster on the side of the screen that you're closest to. 4K claims that the ideal viewing angle is between -35 and +35 degrees. A curved TV stretches reflections. You're more likely to experience this with a glossy screen and dimmed or bright lights." (coolblue)


Our vision isn't completely 2D in that we have peripheral vision beyond 180 degrees. It might be more accurate to say we were looking at a visual screen that's mostly flat but with a slightly curved and blurry edge. We alone are the only ones who can see our own vision and therefore the curved screen won't impinge on the view of a conscious mind that isn't directly behind the eyes.


"A normal visual field for a person covers 170 degrees around, while peripheral vision covers 100 degrees of this field... The peripheral visual field for humans extends 100° horizontally, 60° medially, 60° upward, and 75° downward... (Far-Peripheral Vision: Beyond 60° till 100° to 110° of the visual field.
Mid-Peripheral Vision: Beyond 30° but limited to 60° of the visual field. Near-Peripheral Vision: Beyond 18° till 30° of the visual field.)" - iris vision

"Humans have a slightly over 210-degree forward-facing horizontal arc of their visual field (i.e. without eye movements), (with eye movements included it is slightly larger, as you can try for yourself by wiggling a finger on the side), while some birds have a complete or nearly complete 360-degree visual field. The vertical range of the visual field in humans is around 150 degrees." wiki

Spinning around and getting dizzy is a way to imagine gravity as a Euler force where the height of moving objects becomes unfocused and intermingled.

It's possible to interpret the sense of touch as being entirely proprioceptive and internal. When you touch a hand railing on the street then the tactile sensation would solely be the pressure and movement of your own skin rather than the external resistance of the metal. In this way your vision doesn't have to directly correspond to a physical entity.


Vsauce - You Can't Touch Anything

Do atoms, electrons, photons and electromagnetism exist independently of the mind or are they pure creations of the mind? — Neri

My brain is far more complicated than the thoughts popping into my mind. Likewise the unconscious mind could be more complex than our immediate consciousness. Photons and electrons are highly intricate but then again so is biological evolution. What if my mind doesn't create my coloured impression of photons but rather it could be the other way round where photons through my unconscious constructs my conscious mind.

"Dr. Lanza says the problem is we have everything upside down. He takes the common assumption that the universe led to the creation of life and argues that it's the other way around: that life is not a byproduct of the universe, but its very source. Or put another way, consciousness is what gives rise to our sense of there being an "out there" when, in fact, the world we experience around us is actually created in our consciousness."
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/biocentrism-rethinking-time-space-consciousness-and-the-illusion-of-death-1.3789414

If the former, how do you know? — Neri

If we see a nuclear explosion we've a very limited ability to change our visual perception. A colour-blind person would see the blast in colours other than my own. But if I'm close to the epicentre of the bomb then no matter what my perception of it is or whether I even see it at all, I'll still be killed by the blast. Altering my perception won't alter the objectivity of the event. This implies there's some shared reality that's beyond our control. It doesn't necessarily prove that my consciousness is equivalent to my disintegrated, radiated body since that's a question of life-after-death.

"Because of the Doppler shift, as a moving source approaches a stationary observer, the observed frequency is higher than the source frequency. The faster the source is moving, the higher the observed frequency."
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-osuniversityphysics/chapter/17-8-shock-waves/

What if an atom were like a tachyonic shock wave? Does a mushroom cloud from a nuclear weapon resemble a massive shock wave like the way a small fighter jet creates a cloud breaking the sound barrier? The nucleus would be like the top of the shock wave with the electrons being similar to a compression wave.


Nuclear Explosion


Sonic Boom