fluid theory

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Post Reply
User avatar
the discourse
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:46 am

fluid theory

Post by the discourse » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:09 am

I have been watching modern tv and with these new slowmo HD cameras I have been seeing drag race cars on TV, bend and flex. I began thinking about a simulation called "Rigs and Rods" and I said to myself, do metals behave as chains of rods? I said no, thinking back on Archer's Paradox, I believe metals actually function as a fluid and form wave motions.

Thus it is my hypothesis that all matter in the universe is a fluid and it is only our consciousness which creates the appearance of rigid bodies. Our conscious "frame rate" creates a powerful illusion that rigid bodies exist, when in fact all is fluid. I am wondering if this hypothesis is contradicted by scientific equations or validated.

Furthermore, as a metaphor, mathematics and equations are a sort of "cheat code" in order to bypass reality altogether, it is kind of like a "shortcut" path that goes the opposite way and eventually creates a sort of duplicate mirror world a hollow mannequin of sorts. Mathematics is essentially a metaphor of reality when reality may be an incalculably vast fluid.

In metaphor, the human brain and consciousness can be likened to an order or clockwork surrounded by a storm of ever present fluids at the helm (death), we are the one structured, rigid entity surrounded by fluids and so we liken the world outside us to what's in us, rigid bodies and gear clockwork.

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6030
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: fluid theory

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Sat Sep 09, 2017 7:54 pm

the discourse wrote:... it is only our consciousness which creates the appearance of rigid bodies. Our conscious "frame rate" creates a powerful illusion that rigid bodies exist, when in fact all is fluid. I am wondering if this hypothesis is contradicted by scientific equations or validated.
Scientists are generally not that concerned about how something appears to ordinary consciousness. There are a few models which look at all material as fluid, even the universe like with luminiferous aether now re-emerging as e.g. a quantum vacuum or "pilot wave" theories. When talking to physicists some do admit that they look somewhat "double" at reality and are also aware that daily consciousness is a lot like looking at shadows on the cave wall, perceiving bodies or materials. But do realize that this has been a very practical way to deal with the world, each other and the exchange of things.

I agree that rigid bodies and gear clockworks are first and foremost mental constructs. They are like methodologies to handle what is being thrown at us. Simply stopping to do so tends to decrease our capacity. Any organism which does not abstract its environment doesn't seem to live long enough to pass genes or ideas on. To radically alter human perception of world and bodies, the brain needs to be trained, probably in some virtual environment. Mind altering states like drugs are in the end too random, too unguided to train a brain in such a way that it doesn't collapse into fantasy or decay. Although philosophy can become a path.

Post Reply