Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Ezra
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:27 am

Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

Post by Ezra » Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:46 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:07 pm

But if that's so (and hard-nosed empiricism surely takes us there), then what is the empirical explanation for us having any "sense of eternity," or even being able to formulate the concept in the first place? We have just said that "real eternality" is impossible, from a scientific perspective: so we cannot have gotten the idea itself from the "empirical."

So why and how do we even know what "eternity" is?
It’s possible that we don’t. Human beings have a hard time conceptualising it, let alone defining it. In fact, we have a hard if not impossible time defining anything satisfactorily, which is why arguably no philosophical question has ever been ultimately answered to everyone’s satisfaction. We simply have satisfying questions and paradoxes to play with and delight in over tea, coffee, a beer, glass of wine, toke or tab.

“Eternity” is an attempt to grasp at the unknown; a human drive to lockdown, understand, pigeonhole. And a failure to do so.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6348
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

Post by Immanuel Can » Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:13 am

Ezra wrote:
Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:46 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:07 pm

But if that's so (and hard-nosed empiricism surely takes us there), then what is the empirical explanation for us having any "sense of eternity," or even being able to formulate the concept in the first place? We have just said that "real eternality" is impossible, from a scientific perspective: so we cannot have gotten the idea itself from the "empirical."

So why and how do we even know what "eternity" is?
It’s possible that we don’t.
In a sense, yes -- if by "know" we mean, "know comprehensively." How could any finite entity "know" eternity in that way? We don't even know the oceans on our own planet in that way...let alone the universe, or time itself.

But in another sense, no, it's not possible we don't. By this I mean "know as a concept," not "know comprehensively." For indisputably, we DO have the concept, even if we don't have comprehensive knowledge of all it implies. We use the concept pretty routinely, actually.

My question is really how we got any concept that has absolutely no empirical reality from which we could possibly derive it by observation.

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 3407
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

Post by attofishpi » Mon Oct 16, 2017 7:36 am

therammo wrote:
Thu Jan 29, 2015 1:50 pm
If we live in a multiverse that indicates eternal inflation, does it mean we actually live over and over again the same life?
I fucking hope not.

KelseyR
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:47 pm

Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

Post by KelseyR » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:03 pm

Your question isn't stupid at all. You simply lack the training to understand how it works. In short, there are three postulated recurrence types: stagnant, erosive, and balanced. They all deal with the amount of change between a current event and its replacement. Stagnant recurrence is virtually pure repetition of information. Erosive recurrence is virtually pure innovation of information. Only a balanced type is viable because it avoids both systemic degradation and a queuing problem in excessive wait times between connected events. This means that there is nothing to fear. There is no horrific and meaningless replaying of events over and over. It's more like worthwhile exploration.

Richter018
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2018 4:44 pm

Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

Post by Richter018 » Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:45 pm

Mystics, poets, have said everything is eternal YET time is illusory, ephemeral, a dream. Relativity suggests this as well, a block universe YET at the quantum level the particle doesn't exist until it's observed. So eternal recurrence could only be a recurrence of consciousness/soul into an illusory, eternal, STATIC universe i.e. the universe doesn't recur, only mind/soul/consciousness can recur; only a transcendental noumenon can "recur" into the determined, static universe. It seems "free will" requires a multiverse but multiverse theory is no scientific theory at all, it's a mere hypothesis.

I'm obsessed with the idea that the Monad/Absolute's creation is that of an illusory hierarchy of Beings which seem to evolve towards the Monad...but again, creation is illusory. The Monad is in truth all that exists. The Hindus have this fascinating idea of "Isvara" which translates to the pinnacle of the illusory evolution of the Monad i.e. God incarnate. Imagine a solipsistic being who is the summation of the evolution of all beings...that has reincarnated as every being who has ever existed...and since there are no more incarnations left to experience...it recurs into the same life over and over again for all eternity. In ways it parallels the Lucifer myth: a being closest to a transcendental God yet rebels and takes on a terrestrial, illusory form..."God of this world".

User avatar
mohamedtaqi
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 5:38 pm

Re: Are we eternal? (Eternal Recurrence)

Post by mohamedtaqi » Mon Aug 26, 2019 6:06 pm

Interesting question, here is what I think :

There are 2 possibilities regarding consciousness ( the I ), since we do not know how does the brain produce my conscious experience :

A- Either my consciousness is repeatable (if you build a similar brain)
B- Or it is very unique, such that even if you rebuild my brain, the new 'me' would only be a twin with the same personality.

Let's adopt a 100% agnostic position, so A 50% and B is 50% probable.

We are only concerned with A, so let's assume A is the case. Then we will have two other possibilities regarding existence itself (one or multiple Universes):

C- Either either existence is infinite in time (so that it has no beginning, or no end, or neither).
D- Or, existence has a beginning and end.

If we adopt a 100% agnostic position (since even if our Universe "started" with a big bang, 'started' here with cross-fingers. We do not know whether there is a Multiverse or no, so we do not know pretty much everything about whether existence has beginning or not) ... then, absolute agnosticism tells us that C is 50% probable and D is also 50% probable.

We are only concerned with C ... so let's ignore D.

We have also another condition, the Universe must NOT include an infinite amount of possible configurations, that is, different configurations and arrangement of the matter in all existence has to be finite. Because if it is infinite, then the probability of there "me" happening again decreases to, practically, zero (becomes very improbable in other words).

E - Possible configurations of matter in all existence is finite.
F - Possible configurations of matter in all existence is infinite.

I personally cannot adopt a very agnostic view (like 50-50%) here, because I know that the Universe is probably infinite in space based on modern physics measurements, so our Universe is probably flat, which implies infinite in space, which highly suggests that the amount of stuff in the Universe is probably infinite, let's give it a 66% probability (the Universe can still be finite and spherical and have a very small curvature that cannot be detected, if it is too large).

So, E gets a 33% probability .

But why exactly did I give it 66% probability?

Because there are two types of infinite Universes (in space) : Flat and saddle shaped Universe, while there is only one finite Universe (spherical Universe). so 66% to 33%. That's why I am not fully agnostic about this one.

Now, for there to be an eternal recurrence of the exact same me, A (P=50%) and C(P=50%) and E(P=33%) must all be true , and probabilities here are with respect to the maximum agnosticism I can express.

the probability of the 3 being true is : 0.5 * 0.5 * 0.33 = 8.25%

So, probably eternal recurrence is false (even if you are 100% agnostic about the probabilities), let's see .. if you are 100% agnostic about E then it becomes 50% probable.

Thus, 0.5^3 = 12.5%

So, the probability of eternal recurrence is between 8.25 and 12.5%

Because in my opinion I think that these are the ingredients :

1- Existence must be eternal.
2- Consciousness must be repeatable
3- Possible configurations must be finite.

That's it ^^, we don't know. But the idea is both scaring and comforting , why?

1- It is scary because it means that I will experience all possible lives (not only the same life repeated over and over, but also different lives), which implies that I will experience all physically and mentally possible sufferings.

2- It is comforting, because it implies that I will live and experience all possible pleasures.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests