Philosophy Now Forum

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 10:02 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 9:04 am

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 8:52 am

ONCE AGAIN, this one 'TRIES TO' DEFLECT, and thus, AGAIN, 'ATTEMPTS' to DECEIVE you readers, here.

No, observation is an occurence. The observer is an occurence. These things are subject to occurence.

LOL Talk about COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSING things, here.

So observation and the observer do not occur?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 3:38 am

"brian cox" only THINKS it knows a thing or two. Just in its very first sentence it has made some provable False and Wrong claims.

'Brian Cox' is just a quantum particle in the quantum soup of infinite possibility.

And, from another perspective the words "brian cox" are just a conceptual term, phrase, name, or label placed upon a combination of 'matter', and 'space', which come from what is labeled 'a human body', usually around the conceptual term called 'the birth'.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm Unobserved, this particle behaves like a wave, existing in superposition until it is observed, once observed, the reality of 'Brian Cox' comes into being,

And, HOW would 'you', or ANY one else, KNOW, FOR SURE, that 'it' exists in so-called 'superposition', EXACTLY?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm comes to life so to speak, creation is born, along with the creation of conceptual language used to illustrate what creation is and how it is brought to life, from the unobserved state into the changed state that is the effect of observation.

AGAIN, HOW could ANY one KNOW, without doubt, if there was a DIFFERENCE BEFORE 'observation', or 'the effect of observation'?

Are 'you' ABLE TO EXPLAIN 'HOW'?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm The Observer Effect — How Observing Changes Reality
''The observer effect is often associated with the wave function collapse.

ONCE AGAIN, 'we' have ANOTHER example of HOW and WHEN people like to 'try to' USE words in a particular order, to 'sound like' they KNOW what they are talking about, and/or when they are 'trying to' back up and support some BELIEF that they are HOLDING ONTO. However, WHEN QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED, then how much they REALLY KNOW, FOR SURE, comes-to-light, for ALL to LOOK AT, and SEE.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm When a quantum particle is unobserved, it behaves like a wave, existing in multiple states.

LOL AGAIN, HOW would absolutely ANY one KNOW 'this'?

Also, how MANY of you have ACTUALLY CONSIDERED WHAT a so-called 'quantum particle' ACTUALLY IS?

Now, CONSIDER 'WHAT' is A so-called 'quantum particle', EXACTLY.

WHEN, and IF, ANY one ANSWERS 'this', then what is the ACTUAL DIFFERENCE between a 'quantum particle' AND just 'a particle', EXACTLY?

What are they BOTH made up of or out of, EXACTLY?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm However, once we attempt to measure it, the wave function collapses, and the particle “chooses” a single, definite state.

HOW does ANY one KNOW, WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY, that 'it' is a so-called 'wave function'?

OBVIOUSLY, if there is ABSOLUTELY NO one/thing that can 'OBSERVE' 'it', then HOW would ANY one KNOW, FOR SURE, what 'it' is, EXACTLY?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm The mere act of observing changes how particles behave.

Yes i have heard and read this EXACT SAME thing COUNTLESS TIMES BEFORE. But, 'this', in and of itself, NEVER means that what is said and/nor written is ABSOLUTELY True, Right, Accurate, and/or Correct.

The CLAIM that the mere act of observing changes how particles behave is ABSOLUTELY UNPROVABLE. So, CLAIMING that it is True or Right is a Falsehood.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm If left unobserved, they act as waves.

Besides some one TELLING you 'this', HOW do you KNOW that 'this' is True AND Correct?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm When observed, they act like particles.

How MANY TIMES are you going to RE-REPEAT the SAME thing/s, here.

It is like the MORE TIME you SAY 'it' the MORE you are HOPING that 'it' is TRUE AND CORRECT.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm The observer effect here seems almost paradoxical: the particles’ behavior depends on whether or not we’re watching.

REALLY?

Did the moon CHANGE, ONLY WHEN human beings came INTO Existence?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm People change their behavior when they know they’re being watched.

Are you 'TRYING TO' say 'this' as though saying 'this' will SOMEHOW back up and support your PREVIOUS CLAIMS, here?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm This effect underscores how observation can influence behavior — a connection that helps us grasp the quantum observer effect’s implications.''

How older human beings CHANGE 'the ways' that 'they miss or behave' when they are being WATCHED, and/or OBSERVED, may well be VERY True. But, HOW a table CHANGES when it is being WATCHED, or OBSERVED, may well be VERY DIFFERENT, indeed.

In fact, a table MAY WELL NOT CHANGE, its behavior, AT ALL.

As I have POINTED OUT, above here, NONE of you WILL EVER KNOW, FOR SURE.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 3:38 amNow, ONCE AGAIN, if absolutely ANY one would like to have A DISCUSSION, here, then let 'us' proceed.

Proceed...

What would you like to 'proceed' IN, EXACTLY?

Would you like to DISCUSS the Falsehoods and Wrong CLAIMS made by the human being known as "brian cox" in that first sentence of its, in that link that you sent 'us', here?

If yes, then just let 'us' KNOW.

I am NOT SURE I have to make this ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, before it is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, but I do not like to ASSUME absolutely ANY thing.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:22 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 10:02 am

LOL Talk about COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSING things, here.

Nothing is missing on the molecular level of matter which could be said to not exist as when atoms are broken down into quarks and further into the quantum field where everything is only energy and vibrating.

I NEVER even REMOTELY CLAIMED that ANY thing other than 'that HUMAN BEING', known as "eodnhoh7", here, was MISSING things, above here, in REGARDS TO what I was actually saying and meaning, ONLY.

Also, EVERY thing you said and mentioned, here, is only so-called 'broken down' in CONCEPTION, ONLY. As the One and ONLY 'Thing', EXISTING, can NOT be so-called 'broken down' in ANY other way.

And, as I have PREVIOUSLY STATED the human brain only 'does this' because this is the only way 'the human brain' can work out how 'it', 'the human body', and 'the human being' FITS IN TO 'the picture', HERE.

Out of curiosity, WHY do 'you' say and state that everything is nothing if you also say and state that everything is only energy and vibrating?

If there is only 'nothing', then HOW could there be 'vibrating energy'?

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm Matter then would only be perceived as an illusion to the senses.

TO 'the senses' of 'what', exactly?

If 'matter' is ONLY 'an illusion', ONLY. Then, TO 'the thing' that is HAVING 'the illusion/s', and/or 'perception/s', would also be ABSOLUTELY NOTHING other than a 'vibrating energy' AS WELL.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm Theoretically absolutely nothing and everything exists on that note. Energy is neither created nor destroyed, so as long as there is an observer, there will be the observed.

So, 'now' EXPLAIN who a so-called 'observer' is, EXACTLY, and what is this so-called 'observer' made out of, EXACTLY.

Also, EXPLAIN what 'it' is, EXACTLY, that is, supposedly, 'being observed'.

Obviously, if 'it' is just 'vibrating energy' ONLY, and of NO 'matter' AT ALL, then 'the so-claimed observed' can NOT be 'seen' AT ALL, either.

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:13 pm So yeah, no one can die, one is already dead or alive, depending on participation of this infinite eternal dance of now you see me, now you don't.

WHY do 'you' AGAIN speak as though there are 'two', or 'more'?

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 4:40 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 10:02 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 9:04 am

No, observation is an occurence. The observer is an occurence. These things are subject to occurence.

LOL Talk about COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSING things, here.

So observation and the observer do not occur?

Are 'you' ASKING 'me', or, are 'you' TELLING 'me'?

you wrote a statement, but with a question mark at the end of your claim.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 7:27 amLOL AGAIN, HOW would absolutely ANY one KNOW 'this'?

I don't know what I know.

It's all just a story I am writing. A story that comes from the same place as all other stories come from. Where is that? I don't know, maybe from out of my arse perhaps?

Who knows anything at all, where were you before you were born, where will you be when you die?


“All that will remain of us is what is written down.” Back in the days when this was being written.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:28 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 7:27 amLOL AGAIN, HOW would absolutely ANY one KNOW 'this'?

I don't know what I know.

It's all just a story I am writing. A story that comes from the same place as all other stories come from. Where is that? I don't know, maybe from out of my arse perhaps?

ONCE AGAIN, WHEN QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED, they 'RUN AWAY'.

In the days when this was being written some people would CLAIM that 'matter', itself, CHANGES its 'behavior' when being observed. But, when INVITED to just HAVE A DISCUSSION, OFF they go.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:28 pm Who knows anything at all,

EVERY one.

EVERY one KNOWS what they NEED, in Life, for example. And, from the youngest to the oldest.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:28 pm where were you before you were born, where will you be when you die?

But, there is ONLY One, who, OBVIOUSLY, was NEVER born, and who NEVER dies, AS WELL, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:28 pm “All that will remain of us is what is written down.” Back in the days when this was being written.

Who and/or what is 'us', exactly, which 'you' speak of and mention, here?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pmBut, there is ONLY One, who, OBVIOUSLY, was NEVER born, and who NEVER dies, AS WELL, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pmONCE AGAIN, WHEN QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED, they 'RUN AWAY'.

How can one who was never born and who never dies run away?

And obviously, if one is never born, then this one that was never born cannot die, because this one wasn't even born in the first place.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pm LOL AGAIN, HOW would absolutely ANY one KNOW 'this'?

I guess you do.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:30 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pmBut, there is ONLY One, who, OBVIOUSLY, was NEVER born, and who NEVER dies, AS WELL, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pmONCE AGAIN, WHEN QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED, they 'RUN AWAY'.

How can one who was never born and who never dies run away?

That One does NOT.

It is ONLY 'you', human beings, who can and DO 'run away', when AFRAID and SCARED.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:30 pm And obviously, if one is never born, then this one that was never born cannot die, because this one wasn't even born in the first place.

Obviously.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:30 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pm LOL AGAIN, HOW would absolutely ANY one KNOW 'this'?

I guess you do.

WHY would you and WHY did you RESORT to A GUESS?

My QUESTIONING was to just POINT OUT that it would be an IMPOSSIBILITY to KNOW, for sure, that the claim, matter CHANGES its BEHAVIOR when being observed, from when it was not being observed.

This could NEVER be PROVEN True, thus KNOWN, BECAUSE there is, literally, NO one 'observing' what is HAPPENING and TAKEN PLACE when 'it' is not being observed. So, what is ACTUALLY HAPPENING and OCCURRING NO one KNOWS, FOR SURE.

That was ALL that I was ALLUDING TO, in MY QUESTIONING.

But which, AGAIN, I WILL REMAIN OPEN TO SEE if MY QUESTION can be and will be ANSWERED.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:30 pm How can one who was never born and who never dies run away?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 2:14 amThat One does NOT.

It is ONLY 'you', human beings, who can and DO 'run away', when AFRAID and SCARED.

So there's One who does not run away, and One that does run away?
Does that mean there are two One's? ..One that does, and One that doesn't?


When Fairy asked...where were you before you were born, where will you be when you die?
You answered..

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 2:14 amBut, there is ONLY One, who, OBVIOUSLY, was NEVER born, and who NEVER dies, AS WELL, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

ONLY ONE....means not two, right?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pm WHY would you and WHY did you RESORT to A GUESS?

My QUESTIONING was to just POINT OUT that it would be an IMPOSSIBILITY to KNOW, for sure, that the claim, matter CHANGES its BEHAVIOR when being observed, from when it was not being observed.

This could NEVER be PROVEN True, thus KNOWN, BECAUSE there is, literally, NO one 'observing' what is HAPPENING and TAKEN PLACE when 'it' is not being observed. So, what is ACTUALLY HAPPENING and OCCURRING NO one KNOWS, FOR SURE.

That was ALL that I was ALLUDING TO, in MY QUESTIONING.

But which, AGAIN, I WILL REMAIN OPEN TO SEE if MY QUESTION can be and will be ANSWERED.

Matter does change it's behaviour as if it senses it's being watched.
For example: people usually do not like to be watched while taking a dump. That's why they prefer to do it in private, and not do it when they sense they are being watched.. There's a behavioural change right there in that example, right?

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 2:30 pm How can one who was never born and who never dies run away?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 2:14 amThat One does NOT.

It is ONLY 'you', human beings, who can and DO 'run away', when AFRAID and SCARED.

So there's One who does not run away, and One that does run away?

ONCE AGAIN, you are NOT READING AND COMPREHENDING, AT THE SAME TIME.

The word 'One', (did you NOTICE the capital 'o'), IS DIFFERENT FROM 'one', (without a capital 'o').

ONCE AGAIN, there is ONLY One. BUT there IS MANY of 'you' 'ones'.

So, 'you', the human being, here, which goes by, and under, the label "fairy", ('now' and this time), 'RAN AWAY', as some call it, WHEN 'you' were QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED OVER another one of 'your CLAIMS', here, in this forum.

AGAIN, I suggest you SEEK OUT and OBTAIN, and GAIN, ACTUAL CLARIFICATION BEFORE you ASSUME ABSOLUTELY ANY thing AT ALL, in Life.

Now, you HAVE, ALSO, and ONCE AGAIN, written A STATEMENT, and CLAIM, with A QUESTION MARK at the end of it.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am Does that mean there are two One's? ..One that does, and One that doesn't?

NO.

AGAIN, if you HAD SOUGHT OUT and OBTAINED ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, BEFORE you WROTE your FIRST STATEMENT, with the question mark, then you would NOT have MADE MORE ASSUMPTIONS, and NOR JUMPED TO MORE CONCLUSIONS, which were ALL Wrong, FROM the outset.

The word 'One' refers to the One and ONLY One. The word 'one' refers to the CONCEPTUALLY ONLY PERCEIVED and LABELLED SEPARATED and DIFFERENT 'ones'.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am When Fairy asked...where were you before you were born, where will you be when you die?
You answered..

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 2:14 amBut, there is ONLY One, who, OBVIOUSLY, was NEVER born, and who NEVER dies, AS WELL, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

ONLY ONE....means not two, right?

YES.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE of 'THE WAY' the human brain WORKS, where it NEEDS to 'separate', CONCEPTUALLY, (or what you refer to as ILLUSORY), there NEEDS to be A CONCEIVED, PERCEPTION, of MORE, than just One. So, that the human brain, and 'you', human beings, can MAKE SENSE of this One and ONLY Universe in which 'you' have ("all") found "yourselves" WITH, and IN.

ALL-OF-THIS WILL MAKE FAR MORE SENSE, as 'we' MOVE ALONG, here.

And, to SPEED UP THE PROCESS, I will suggest, ONCE AGAIN, ALWAYS SEEK OUT and OBTAIN ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, in regards to ANY and EVERY thing, BEFORE ABSOLUTELY ANY PRE-ASSUMPTIONS are MADE, AT ALL.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 1:59 pm WHY would you and WHY did you RESORT to A GUESS?

My QUESTIONING was to just POINT OUT that it would be an IMPOSSIBILITY to KNOW, for sure, that the claim, matter CHANGES its BEHAVIOR when being observed, from when it was not being observed.

This could NEVER be PROVEN True, thus KNOWN, BECAUSE there is, literally, NO one 'observing' what is HAPPENING and TAKEN PLACE when 'it' is not being observed. So, what is ACTUALLY HAPPENING and OCCURRING NO one KNOWS, FOR SURE.

That was ALL that I was ALLUDING TO, in MY QUESTIONING.

But which, AGAIN, I WILL REMAIN OPEN TO SEE if MY QUESTION can be and will be ANSWERED.

Matter does change it's behaviour as if it senses it's being watched.

ONCE AGAIN, HOW would 'you' OR ANY OF 'you', human beings, BE ABLE TO KNOW 'this', FOR SURE?

EXPLAIN TO the readers, here, HOW 'this' could be POSSIBLY TESTED, AND VERIFIED or FALSIFIED.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am For example: people usually do not like to be watched while taking a dump.

ONLY IN the 'times' AND 'societies/cultures' 'you' have been PERSONALLY brought up or raised in.

Do you, REALLY, BELIEVE that "aboriginal" peoples who were NO 'dress' REALLY CARED if ANY one saw them 'taking a, so-called dump'?

This would be like CLAIMING non human animals usually do not like to be watched while 'taking a dump'.

you are ONLY 'looking at' AND 'seeing' 'this' from a Truly VERY NARROWED perspective, or field of view. you, like ALL of the other posters, here, in this forum, are PROVING, ABSOLUTELY TRUE, you are 'LOOKING AT' and 'SEEING' things FROM your OWN 'past experiences' ONLY.

Also, you just made the CLAIM that 'matter', itself, DOES change 'it's' behavior, as if 'it' senses it is being watched. Now, EXPLAIN to the readers, here, how THE 'matter', which makes up A 'rock', A 'table', and/or A 'stool', SUPPOSEDLY, CHANGES 'it's' behavior, as if 'it' senses 'it' is being watched, EXACTLY.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am That's why they prefer to do it in private, and not do it when they sense they are being watched..

'you' may well, PERSONALLY, 'PREFER' 'this', but NO other animal does, NOR do human beings who live OUTSIDE of your TINY LITTLE 'framework of time, and of place'.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 8:25 am There's a behavioural change right there in that example, right?

There IS A behavioral change OF A 'human being', or 'person'.

There IS NO behavioral change OF 'matter', itself.

you STARTED OUT, here, by CLAIMING that;

'Matter' does change it's behaviour as if it senses it's being watched', in your first sentence.

But then VERY QUICKLY CHANGED 'it' TO;
'people' usually do not like to be watched while taking a dump, in your next sentence, and example.

Now, I KNOW that a LOT of you posters, here, FAIL TO SEE and RECOGNIZE the DECEPTIONS in 'your writings'. And, I KNOW that A LOT OF those DECEPTIONS were COMPLETELY UNINTENDED. I ALSO KNOW that it WILL BE ONLY THROUGH A THOROUGH INTROSPECTION, and A Truly OPEN and Honest DISCUSSIONS that I can BRING ALL of the things that I WANT TO POINT OUT and BRING-TO-LIGHT, WHERE and WHEN 'they' CAN BE. But, can you SEE how 'you' JUMPED FROM 'matter' TO 'people', as SPOKE and WROTE as though 'they' ARE the EXACT SAME things, and BEHAVE in the EXACT SAME WAY?

OBVIOUSLY, you human beings DO CHANGE your behaviors WHEN you are BEING WATCHED and/or OBSERVED. (I ALREADY AGREED WITH you ON 'this' PREVIOUSLY). HOWEVER, and I WILL GET BACK TO 'this', just BECAUSE SOME human beings CLAIM that 'matter', itself, CHANGES 'its' BEHAVIOR, when 'it' is being observed does NOT necessarily MEAN that 'matter', itself, does.

1. I WILL WAIT FOR ACTUAL PROOF WILL BE PROVIDED, FIRST, BEFORE I ACCEPT and ACKNOWLEDGE that 'matter', itself, does.

2. I WILL KEEP ASKING, HOW COULD you human beings EVER KNOW, FOR SURE, if 'matter', itself, DOES CHANGE 'its' BEHAVIOR WHEN BEING OBSERVED, when, OBVIOUSLY, ABSOLUTELY NO one COULD KNOW HOW 'matter' IS BEHAVING WHEN 'it' is NOT BEING OBSERVED?

3. Now, OBVIOUSLY, some people might SAY, or CLAIM, that the 'double split experiment' PROVES HOW 'matter' WAS BEHAVING, BEFORE 'matter' was BEING OBSERVED. HOWEVER, these people FAIL TO REALIZE that what WAS BEING SHOWN and/or PROVEN was 'THE RESULT' of HOW 'matter' WAS BEHAVING.

4. It is AN ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY TO 'SEE' what IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING WHEN 'matter' is NOT being observed. So, HOW 'matter' IS ACTUALLY BEHAVING, WHEN NOT BEING OBSERVED, IS NOT POSSIBLE. 'The RESULTS', on A WALL, may well be 'SEEN' TO BE DIFFERENT. But, what WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING, thus HOW 'it' WAS ACTUALLY BEHAVING, 'at the time' WHEN 'it' WAS NOT BEING OBSERVED, can NOT BE KNOWN. Unless, OF COURSE, some one just ANSWERS the QUESTION, 'HOW can one KNOW, FOR SURE, how some thing IS BEHAVING WHEN 'it' IS NOT BEING OBSERVED?'

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 10:20 amOBVIOUSLY, you human beings DO CHANGE your behaviors WHEN you are BEING WATCHED and/or OBSERVED. (I ALREADY AGREED WITH you ON 'this' PREVIOUSLY).



HOWEVER, and I WILL GET BACK TO 'this', just BECAUSE SOME human beings CLAIM that 'matter', itself, CHANGES 'its' BEHAVIOR, when 'it' is being observed does NOT necessarily MEAN that 'matter', itself, does.

So there is behavioural change when there is the sense of being watched.

That's all I was saying all along. So no problem.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 10:20 am ONCE AGAIN, you are NOT READING AND COMPREHENDING, AT THE SAME TIME.

The word 'One', (did you NOTICE the capital 'o'), IS DIFFERENT FROM 'one', (without a capital 'o').

ONCE AGAIN, there is ONLY One. BUT there IS MANY of 'you' 'ones'.

So, 'you', the human being, here, which goes by, and under, the label "fairy", ('now' and this time), 'RAN AWAY', as some call it, WHEN 'you' were QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED OVER another one of 'your CLAIMS', here, in this forum.

AGAIN, I suggest you SEEK OUT and OBTAIN, and GAIN, ACTUAL CLARIFICATION BEFORE you ASSUME ABSOLUTELY ANY thing AT ALL, in Life.

Now, you HAVE, ALSO, and ONCE AGAIN, written A STATEMENT, and CLAIM, with A QUESTION MARK at the end of it.

NO.

AGAIN, if you HAD SOUGHT OUT and OBTAINED ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, BEFORE you WROTE your FIRST STATEMENT, with the question mark, then you would NOT have MADE MORE ASSUMPTIONS, and NOR JUMPED TO MORE CONCLUSIONS, which were ALL Wrong, FROM the outset.

The word 'One' refers to the One and ONLY One. The word 'one' refers to the CONCEPTUALLY ONLY PERCEIVED and LABELLED SEPARATED and DIFFERENT 'ones'.

YES.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE of 'THE WAY' the human brain WORKS, where it NEEDS to 'separate', CONCEPTUALLY, (or what you refer to as ILLUSORY), there NEEDS to be A CONCEIVED, PERCEPTION, of MORE, than just One. So, that the human brain, and 'you', human beings, can MAKE SENSE of this One and ONLY Universe in which 'you' have ("all") found "yourselves" WITH, and IN.

ALL-OF-THIS WILL MAKE FAR MORE SENSE, as 'we' MOVE ALONG, here.

And, to SPEED UP THE PROCESS, I will suggest, ONCE AGAIN, ALWAYS SEEK OUT and OBTAIN ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, in regards to ANY and EVERY thing, BEFORE ABSOLUTELY ANY PRE-ASSUMPTIONS are MADE, AT ALL.

ONCE AGAIN, HOW would 'you' OR ANY OF 'you', human beings, BE ABLE TO KNOW 'this', FOR SURE?

EXPLAIN TO the readers, here, HOW 'this' could be POSSIBLY TESTED, AND VERIFIED or FALSIFIED.

ONLY IN the 'times' AND 'societies/cultures' 'you' have been PERSONALLY brought up or raised in.

Do you, REALLY, BELIEVE that "aboriginal" peoples who were NO 'dress' REALLY CARED if ANY one saw them 'taking a, so-called dump'?

This would be like CLAIMING non human animals usually do not like to be watched while 'taking a dump'.

you are ONLY 'looking at' AND 'seeing' 'this' from a Truly VERY NARROWED perspective, or field of view. you, like ALL of the other posters, here, in this forum, are PROVING, ABSOLUTELY TRUE, you are 'LOOKING AT' and 'SEEING' things FROM your OWN 'past experiences' ONLY.

Also, you just made the CLAIM that 'matter', itself, DOES change 'it's' behavior, as if 'it' senses it is being watched. Now, EXPLAIN to the readers, here, how THE 'matter', which makes up A 'rock', A 'table', and/or A 'stool', SUPPOSEDLY, CHANGES 'it's' behavior, as if 'it' senses 'it' is being watched, EXACTLY.
'you' may well, PERSONALLY, 'PREFER' 'this', but NO other animal does, NOR do human beings who live OUTSIDE of your TINY LITTLE 'framework of time, and of place'.
There IS A behavioral change OF A 'human being', or 'person'.

There IS NO behavioral change OF 'matter', itself.

you STARTED OUT, here, by CLAIMING that;

But then VERY QUICKLY CHANGED 'it' TO;

Now, I KNOW that a LOT of you posters, here, FAIL TO SEE and RECOGNIZE the DECEPTIONS in 'your writings'. And, I KNOW that A LOT OF those DECEPTIONS were COMPLETELY UNINTENDED. I ALSO KNOW that it WILL BE ONLY THROUGH A THOROUGH INTROSPECTION, and A Truly OPEN and Honest DISCUSSIONS that I can BRING ALL of the things that I WANT TO POINT OUT and BRING-TO-LIGHT, WHERE and WHEN 'they' CAN BE. But, can you SEE how 'you' JUMPED FROM 'matter' TO 'people', as SPOKE and WROTE as though 'they' ARE the EXACT SAME things, and BEHAVE in the EXACT SAME WAY?

OBVIOUSLY, you human beings DO CHANGE your behaviors WHEN you are BEING WATCHED and/or OBSERVED. (I ALREADY AGREED WITH you ON 'this' PREVIOUSLY). HOWEVER, and I WILL GET BACK TO 'this', just BECAUSE SOME human beings CLAIM that 'matter', itself, CHANGES 'its' BEHAVIOR, when 'it' is being observed does NOT necessarily MEAN that 'matter', itself, does.

1. I WILL WAIT FOR ACTUAL PROOF WILL BE PROVIDED, FIRST, BEFORE I ACCEPT and ACKNOWLEDGE that 'matter', itself, does.

2. I WILL KEEP ASKING, HOW COULD you human beings EVER KNOW, FOR SURE, if 'matter', itself, DOES CHANGE 'its' BEHAVIOR WHEN BEING OBSERVED, when, OBVIOUSLY, ABSOLUTELY NO one COULD KNOW HOW 'matter' IS BEHAVING WHEN 'it' is NOT BEING OBSERVED?

3. Now, OBVIOUSLY, some people might SAY, or CLAIM, that the 'double split experiment' PROVES HOW 'matter' WAS BEHAVING, BEFORE 'matter' was BEING OBSERVED. HOWEVER, these people FAIL TO REALIZE that what WAS BEING SHOWN and/or PROVEN was 'THE RESULT' of HOW 'matter' WAS BEHAVING.

4. It is AN ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY TO 'SEE' what IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING WHEN 'matter' is NOT being observed. So, HOW 'matter' IS ACTUALLY BEHAVING, WHEN NOT BEING OBSERVED, IS NOT POSSIBLE. 'The RESULTS', on A WALL, may well be 'SEEN' TO BE DIFFERENT. But, what WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING, thus HOW 'it' WAS ACTUALLY BEHAVING, 'at the time' WHEN 'it' WAS NOT BEING OBSERVED, can NOT BE KNOWN. Unless, OF COURSE, some one just ANSWERS the QUESTION, 'HOW can one KNOW, FOR SURE, how some thing IS BEHAVING WHEN 'it' IS NOT BEING OBSERVED?'

The stable rising trend towards the end is slightly worrying.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 10:52 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 10:20 amOBVIOUSLY, you human beings DO CHANGE your behaviors WHEN you are BEING WATCHED and/or OBSERVED. (I ALREADY AGREED WITH you ON 'this' PREVIOUSLY).



HOWEVER, and I WILL GET BACK TO 'this', just BECAUSE SOME human beings CLAIM that 'matter', itself, CHANGES 'its' BEHAVIOR, when 'it' is being observed does NOT necessarily MEAN that 'matter', itself, does.

So there is behavioural change when there is the sense of being watched.

In SOME 'things', but NOT ALL 'things', OBVIOUSLY.

Fairy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 10:52 am That's all I was saying all along. So no problem.

OF COURSE 'you', human beings, CHANGE 'your behaviors' WHEN 'you' are BEING WATCHED, or OBSERVED.

I POINTED 'this' OUT PREVIOUSLY, WHEN I AGREED WITH you the FIRST TIME, here.

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 11:08 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2025 10:20 am ONCE AGAIN, you are NOT READING AND COMPREHENDING, AT THE SAME TIME.

The word 'One', (did you NOTICE the capital 'o'), IS DIFFERENT FROM 'one', (without a capital 'o').

ONCE AGAIN, there is ONLY One. BUT there IS MANY of 'you' 'ones'.

So, 'you', the human being, here, which goes by, and under, the label "fairy", ('now' and this time), 'RAN AWAY', as some call it, WHEN 'you' were QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED OVER another one of 'your CLAIMS', here, in this forum.

AGAIN, I suggest you SEEK OUT and OBTAIN, and GAIN, ACTUAL CLARIFICATION BEFORE you ASSUME ABSOLUTELY ANY thing AT ALL, in Life.

Now, you HAVE, ALSO, and ONCE AGAIN, written A STATEMENT, and CLAIM, with A QUESTION MARK at the end of it.

NO.

AGAIN, if you HAD SOUGHT OUT and OBTAINED ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, BEFORE you WROTE your FIRST STATEMENT, with the question mark, then you would NOT have MADE MORE ASSUMPTIONS, and NOR JUMPED TO MORE CONCLUSIONS, which were ALL Wrong, FROM the outset.

The word 'One' refers to the One and ONLY One. The word 'one' refers to the CONCEPTUALLY ONLY PERCEIVED and LABELLED SEPARATED and DIFFERENT 'ones'.

YES.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE of 'THE WAY' the human brain WORKS, where it NEEDS to 'separate', CONCEPTUALLY, (or what you refer to as ILLUSORY), there NEEDS to be A CONCEIVED, PERCEPTION, of MORE, than just One. So, that the human brain, and 'you', human beings, can MAKE SENSE of this One and ONLY Universe in which 'you' have ("all") found "yourselves" WITH, and IN.

ALL-OF-THIS WILL MAKE FAR MORE SENSE, as 'we' MOVE ALONG, here.

And, to SPEED UP THE PROCESS, I will suggest, ONCE AGAIN, ALWAYS SEEK OUT and OBTAIN ACTUAL CLARIFICATION, in regards to ANY and EVERY thing, BEFORE ABSOLUTELY ANY PRE-ASSUMPTIONS are MADE, AT ALL.

ONCE AGAIN, HOW would 'you' OR ANY OF 'you', human beings, BE ABLE TO KNOW 'this', FOR SURE?

EXPLAIN TO the readers, here, HOW 'this' could be POSSIBLY TESTED, AND VERIFIED or FALSIFIED.

ONLY IN the 'times' AND 'societies/cultures' 'you' have been PERSONALLY brought up or raised in.

Do you, REALLY, BELIEVE that "aboriginal" peoples who were NO 'dress' REALLY CARED if ANY one saw them 'taking a, so-called dump'?

This would be like CLAIMING non human animals usually do not like to be watched while 'taking a dump'.

you are ONLY 'looking at' AND 'seeing' 'this' from a Truly VERY NARROWED perspective, or field of view. you, like ALL of the other posters, here, in this forum, are PROVING, ABSOLUTELY TRUE, you are 'LOOKING AT' and 'SEEING' things FROM your OWN 'past experiences' ONLY.

Also, you just made the CLAIM that 'matter', itself, DOES change 'it's' behavior, as if 'it' senses it is being watched. Now, EXPLAIN to the readers, here, how THE 'matter', which makes up A 'rock', A 'table', and/or A 'stool', SUPPOSEDLY, CHANGES 'it's' behavior, as if 'it' senses 'it' is being watched, EXACTLY.
'you' may well, PERSONALLY, 'PREFER' 'this', but NO other animal does, NOR do human beings who live OUTSIDE of your TINY LITTLE 'framework of time, and of place'.
There IS A behavioral change OF A 'human being', or 'person'.

There IS NO behavioral change OF 'matter', itself.

you STARTED OUT, here, by CLAIMING that;

But then VERY QUICKLY CHANGED 'it' TO;

Now, I KNOW that a LOT of you posters, here, FAIL TO SEE and RECOGNIZE the DECEPTIONS in 'your writings'. And, I KNOW that A LOT OF those DECEPTIONS were COMPLETELY UNINTENDED. I ALSO KNOW that it WILL BE ONLY THROUGH A THOROUGH INTROSPECTION, and A Truly OPEN and Honest DISCUSSIONS that I can BRING ALL of the things that I WANT TO POINT OUT and BRING-TO-LIGHT, WHERE and WHEN 'they' CAN BE. But, can you SEE how 'you' JUMPED FROM 'matter' TO 'people', as SPOKE and WROTE as though 'they' ARE the EXACT SAME things, and BEHAVE in the EXACT SAME WAY?

OBVIOUSLY, you human beings DO CHANGE your behaviors WHEN you are BEING WATCHED and/or OBSERVED. (I ALREADY AGREED WITH you ON 'this' PREVIOUSLY). HOWEVER, and I WILL GET BACK TO 'this', just BECAUSE SOME human beings CLAIM that 'matter', itself, CHANGES 'its' BEHAVIOR, when 'it' is being observed does NOT necessarily MEAN that 'matter', itself, does.

1. I WILL WAIT FOR ACTUAL PROOF WILL BE PROVIDED, FIRST, BEFORE I ACCEPT and ACKNOWLEDGE that 'matter', itself, does.

2. I WILL KEEP ASKING, HOW COULD you human beings EVER KNOW, FOR SURE, if 'matter', itself, DOES CHANGE 'its' BEHAVIOR WHEN BEING OBSERVED, when, OBVIOUSLY, ABSOLUTELY NO one COULD KNOW HOW 'matter' IS BEHAVING WHEN 'it' is NOT BEING OBSERVED?

3. Now, OBVIOUSLY, some people might SAY, or CLAIM, that the 'double split experiment' PROVES HOW 'matter' WAS BEHAVING, BEFORE 'matter' was BEING OBSERVED. HOWEVER, these people FAIL TO REALIZE that what WAS BEING SHOWN and/or PROVEN was 'THE RESULT' of HOW 'matter' WAS BEHAVING.

4. It is AN ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY TO 'SEE' what IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING WHEN 'matter' is NOT being observed. So, HOW 'matter' IS ACTUALLY BEHAVING, WHEN NOT BEING OBSERVED, IS NOT POSSIBLE. 'The RESULTS', on A WALL, may well be 'SEEN' TO BE DIFFERENT. But, what WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING, thus HOW 'it' WAS ACTUALLY BEHAVING, 'at the time' WHEN 'it' WAS NOT BEING OBSERVED, can NOT BE KNOWN. Unless, OF COURSE, some one just ANSWERS the QUESTION, 'HOW can one KNOW, FOR SURE, how some thing IS BEHAVING WHEN 'it' IS NOT BEING OBSERVED?'

The stable rising trend towards the end is slightly worrying.

WHY is 'it' 'WORRYING', TO 'you' ONLY, here, "atla"?

Also, NOTICE HOW when 'these people', BACK when this was being written, could NOT back up NOR support their views, claims, nor beliefs, NOR could they COUNTER nor REFUTE what I was saying and claiming, they would RESORT to 'this kind of stuff', ONLY, like 'this one' is, here, ONCE AGAIN.

OBVIOUSLY "atla" can NOT in absolutely ANY WAY REFUTE MY CLAIM that the Universe IS infinite AND eternal, and so WILL 'try' ANY thing to SOMEHOW 'try' and DISCREDIT 'me'.