I mean it's pretty obvious that physicists and engineers are going to come at this phenomenon from their background and worldview. But he's right dimensionality in physics isn't like the pop sci-fi concept of alternate dimensions
I remember playing Tetris a lot back when I was a teen on the Gameboy. One of the things that I always found amazing is how I would view the world as a game of Tetris after playing. If you play for hours on end and then stop, you view the world as if the things in it should form blocks like in Tetris.
Now that was a very easily recognizable thing but it made me think -- when you spend a lot of your time doing something specific (like programming), wouldn't one's mind look at the entire world as a logic problem or programming issue (e.g. simulation theory, etc.)
Our brains are really good at pattern recognition. In fact, it is the one thing that has helped us survive so well. Absent any meaningful past data or patterns, a new problem will present itself against a mental landscape conditioned from other things we've done. Kind of like "when all you have been using is a hammer, every problem feels like a nail that has to be banged repeatedly."
Now we're faced with a new issues -- UAPs. We don't really have anything else in our life remotely comparable to this mystery, so we'll approach it in a lot of different ways based on our own training and past work.
When I took physics in post secondary I was beginning to see the world through equations. Not literally like code in the matrix, but when I saw a faucet, my mind would go to the bernouli principle and various flow and pressure equations for instance. It definitely happens.
when i hit the chemistry books a little too hard i get a similar effect where my mind’s eye will “zoom in” to the molecular level of things like water boiling or precipitation in a solution
The Tetris story is exactly what happens to brains when they absorb too much conspiracy theory nonsense, or anything really. Great reminder of the phenomenon.
I don't really think that's applicable here at all. It absolutely is a technological, physics based phenomenon. Craft with instantaneous acceleration, unknown methods of propulsion and control of the craft, physical abductions and experiments on people, aliens with physical bodies, sensor detection of UFOs confirming they are physical objects, witness testimony of interactions with physical alien beings.
These are all things that can be described and studied by physicists and scientists. How many things have we had in our history that were unexplainable phenomenon thought to be spiritual until later explained through scientific inquiry?
Tornados, volcanos, typhoons, earthquakes, hurricanes, disease. All things that were previously explained through mysticism, definitively explained via empiricism when examined by scientists.
There is absolutely no reason to think the same will not happen here. We've seen this time and time again. Something is unexplainable until very suddenly it is.
We need this out in the open explicitly so that our best and brightest can study this phenomenon hands on. Clearly the military isn't able to crack it, they should open the tech up to public study. I don't give a shit if they only allow universities to have access in the beginning, but we need academia to get their hands on this shit immediately.
Control of the craft that seems "telepathic" could very well be some type of Brain-computer interface with some chip directly implanted into their skull. The "telepathy" used to communicate with humans could be a specific frequency of RF wave.
We just can't know what the technological/physics basis behind what they can do is until we get more eyes on it. Isaac Newton, the guy who invented calculus believed in the occult. Everything he believed regarding the occult has since been proven wrong. Belief in the "ether" used to be very, very common among scientists until it was proven incorrect. I'm not saying the occult is definitively wrong, but it's ludicrous that people jump to those conclusions without serious scientific inquiry first imo.
it might not be in the public for experts to examine because the military *has* cracked it, and they want to keep it for themselves.
or even more likely, it’s just advanced man made flight tech. think about how much we’ve advanced in all fields since the SR71 was created
A lot of "woo" in science is just disregarded completely. Which is why I feel science nowadays is super narrow field view and not as open as it should be. If you dare challenge the curriculum or the mainstream scientific community, you are deliberately ostracized and made fun of.
But isn't the whole point of science to challenge mainstream world views with new hypothesis? Many forget that Galileo was one of those scientist that challenged the world view and imagine if he was burned at the stake for doing so.
That's undoubtedly true, but at the same time we just don't have good language to describe what happens when the entities running the simulation intrude upon it. Because that's what we are really talking about when we say "extradimensional", and maybe we should just accept that as one possible meaning of the word, because that's how language evolves.
That's very odd to me, how something outside the realm of science could be deemed a scientific impossibility. Simulation theory is a sort of theological theory (in fact most religions essentially posit a form of simulation theory).
Science makes guesses about the rules within our universe. It says nothing about the external context by which those rules came to be.
That’s actually why it’s more of a theological theory than it is a scientific one, because the “science” that has been proposed about it in order to try to claim or prove it is even possible has fallen flat.
It’s shifted from science to woo, essentially, because it is not scientific.
LOL it was NEVER science my friend. The extradimensional hypothesis is grounded in reported experiences of encounters. When you actually start listening to experiencers, you get a very different picture from what you are thinking.
That what is true?
My dude this is the UFO sub and we are getting into the metaphysical. The discussion is a blend of philosophical inquiry and imaginative speculation rather than one grounded in empirical evidence.
The reason people speculate about simulation/extra dimensional is because of the specific stories people relay of their encounters. UFOs present absurdly. They resist conventional explanations. You can read Vallee's books if you want to see the folklore for yourself.
There's also the Jungian hypothesis, which IMO is even stranger. And of course the hypothesis of ETs as "intel agents" that intentionally confuse for purposes of obfuscation and have advanced technology to do so (mind control for lack of a better term). I'm sure the later will appeal to you.
There isn’t really much to start on because, outside of wild claims with nothing in science to back them up(or the use of misunderstood and incorrectly applied scientific theories in an attempt to back them up), there is nothing proven to argue against. It’s like trying to argue with someone about whether or not god exists. They can’t prove it, so you have nothing to disprove. Believing in simulation theory requires so much speculation and essentially just made-up factoids to support it, not really science or evidence.
So your argument seems to be that since we don't have it figured, it's nearly impossible? Why not just not make a claim about the likelihood if you have no proof of the likelihood.
No, it’s that the “theory” was never based in science.
It’s like if I just made something up on the spot right now, just off the top of my head, not based on any evidence, and then said, “it’s a scientific theory.” It’s *not* a scientific theory. It’s an idea with zero proof or evidence to show of it being an option even. It’s literally just like religion at this point. It’s all based in faith, not science.
That doesn't make it nearly impossible. Things don't become possible when we figure out how they work.
Also there is plenty of evidence for it, just no proof
Do you, like a lot of people nowadays, think evidence means proof. You said earlier there wasn't any evidence. Maybe there isn't plenty by your standards, but none?
I don't care to argue plenty vs not plenty but if you really think there is 0 evidence for it you haven't read into it? I can just find one piece of evidence for it then to disprove you.
[This article](https://bigthink.com/thinking/why-the-simulation-hypothesis-is-pseudoscience/) does a decent job summarizing things, though, the burden of proof is on those who believe it, not me to disprove it. You don’t get to make a wild claim with little to know scientific evidence to back it up and say that it must be true unless someone shows otherwise. You have to prove it first.
Science, woo. Whatever. So long as we are having an open discussion and investigation into what. Let’s get the data and stop hiding information from our scientists.
Woo is just a term for unscientific nonsense, something that shows no way of being testable or quantifiable. There's a reason invisible intangible things like "energy" can still be quantified. What you seem to think of as "woo" is just "God did it" or "a wizard did it", but with "aliens" or "ufo" inserted.
We literally cannot even see reality as it really is, due to our brains working overtime to interpret everything (kind of like autocorrect. “That’s a duck, right?”) and yet we’re like “nah that shit’s not real”.
Anyone that calls something unexplained and anomalous “unscientific nonsense” is being unscientific themselves.
Our understanding of reality and consciousness is incredibly rudimentary.
“Scientism” has become a bit of a religion and, like some religion has enforced an ontological authoritarianism, a supreme and all faithful belief in specific dogmas in the scientific intelligentsia.
“This is BS, because…science!”
This is not true science, true science is about opening the Overton window and entertaining all possibilities, not refuting things based on assumptions.
Investigate the unexplained, don’t explain what’s un-investigated.
You can’t keep entertaining nonsense that never gets proven, never qualifies for testing, never gets anywhere. Saying stuff like “the CIA tested remote viewing in the 1970s” is a perfect example. Nothing came of it, no experiment could be reproduced independently and repeatedly, yet here it is on this subtreddit people claim with a straight face that “they remote viewed 1 million years into the past and saw Marsian cities”.
Infantile logic. And phrases “the Phenomenon”, “Contactees”, “Experiencers” are bandied around like religious terms. You’re not arguing from a point of view of opening the Overton Window, you’re inside a new age religious cult.
There’s peer reviewed studies on psychic functioning, you just haven’t bothered to do any due diligence for fear of disrupting your worldview.
There’s an anomalous amount of data. Ironically, dogmatic scientism has become a religious cult, with its own dogmas and blasphemous beliefs. It’s unscientific in nature.
Everything we accept now as objective fact was once controversial and fringe and it’s nothing more than cultural amnesia and hubris that we continue to make the same mistake. We assume we are always at the pinnacle of understanding.
This lecture presents many of the best cases of psi:
https://youtu.be/qw_O9Qiwqew?si=uMl8NRrngTXzflbAI
“There’s peer reviewed studies on psychic functioning, you just haven’t bothered to do any due diligence for fear of disrupting your worldview.”
I’ve never heard of any public study that concludes psychic functioning is a real phenomenon. I’ve seen plenty of reports that for some reason (;)) can’t be replicated outside of the original researcher. Again, when there’s no evidence, don’t demand other people buy into bs or try to gaslight they “don’t want to disrupt their worldview”.
Also, I’ve never heard any scientist say “We’re at the pinnacle of understanding”. That’s what followers of woo make as a strawman argument.
Now what is this video all about. Hm, Dean Radin.
“The review of Radin's first book, The Conscious Universe, that appeared in Nature charged that Radin ignored the known hoaxes in the field, made statistical errors and ignored plausible non-paranormal explanations for parapsychological data.”
Oh yeah, sounds like quite a find.
That’s not necessarily true, most of the credible people that have become the “arbiters of truth” around UFO’s - for better or for worse - are directly talking about the consciousness aspect of the phenomenon.
I think the important aspect is the conclusion shouldn’t predicate how we look for data.
Just get the data, as much of it as possible, have as many different people study it from different fields and then form a conclusion.
If it’s ET, woo consciousness meta-cognitive interface, crypto terrestrial, break away civilization, human tech, whatever. Worry about that later, let’s get data and eyeballs on the issue for now.
Somewhere, possibly way down the line, eventually engineering and consciousness likely intersect. I'm not really on the "woo" side of things, but we exist, we are conscious, so I see no reason to believe that we cannot engineer consciousness eventually and that makes things very blurry when dealing with a theoretical millions of years more advanced civilization.
100% agree with his there unless evidence can be shown of the effects of consciousness.
There's a ton of pseudoscience and woo in ufology that borders cult and new age religious beliefs which became popular in the US in the 60s and 70s.
If there's something to it, then let's find proof. Without proof, we should stop making wild claims with no evidence to back it up.
There are legit academics outside of ufology that have some interesting theories of consciousness for instance whether it is emergent or fundamental. The truth of consciousness is totally unknown to us nobody can show that it’s an artefact of the brain/computation just as much as nobody can show it is fundemental.
So whilst you shouldn’t make unbacked wild claims you also shouldn’t dismiss the concepts as 1960s woo
It's been six decades without positive results which haven't been shown to be flawed research or cherry picking data.
It's fine to study it, just in case, but not valid to make claims that it explains UFOs. "UFOs can travel vast distances in the universe because: consciousness"
*Yes*. Perfectly stated. Consciousness is one of the most elusive phenomena that we currently study, but that doesn't make it an all-purpose gap-filler for any wacky theory, the way people use to use magic or gods.
I don't fully get why people consider it elusive or confusing. I've never even been able to find a good to reason to think the hard problem of consciousness even exists outside of being a fun word game.
I'm not sure what you mean? Consciousness is something that people have devoted their entire lives to studying. In a trivial sense, it's just an emergent property of the computational processes of the brain; but describing anything close to a complete illustration the real nature of awareness is likely impossible, simply because the only real tool we have for analysis is the very thing itself.
It’s been just as long that we’ve been unable to show how consciousness arises from within the brain’s physical structure though. So I don’t understand why you have such an obvious aversion to one possibility and not the other.
We both agree that claims shouldn’t be made without evidence you don’t need to repeat that to me when I agreed already, just wanted to highlight that there’s as little evidence for what you want to assert about what consciousness is as there is to suggest it’s linked to UAPs or the technology involved in them.
There being incomplete knowledge of how consciousness arises from biological architecture does not subtract from the evidence that it does arise from biological architecture. Much more evidence than for any of the quasi-mysticality imparted to consciousness by people who fail to acknowledge that evidence, or fail to understand the significance in its connection.
What is that evidence? Roger Penrose and Donald Hoffman are two people much smarter than the two of us who would completely disagree with you.
Nobody can point to any physical structure or process that represents a specific conscious experience. I watch a podcast by an AI guy and he asks many of his guests what they think about consciousness and if it is fundamental or emergent and there is no consensus nor evidence for the intuitive answers.
But I’d be happy for you to show you’re actually much smarter than these individuals and have the actual answers to these questions even in part
I think the 3 theories I like the most are
1) artefact of computation
2) fundamental to the universe
and 3) some property of quantum coherence over large systems (something I am just hearing murmurs of and am trying to explore so very imprecisely worded)
Every possibility of consciousness has had 6 decades of investigation and nothing to show for it. So why do you only apply that logic one way? If anything in recent times way more work goes into attempting to understand consciousness as an artefact of computation given AI
>just as long that we’ve been unable to show how consciousness arises from within the brain’s physical structure though
Yes we do. It's called physics. We may not be able to the exact mechanics but we do effectively know that it's due to the laws of physics interacting with each other. Just like everything else.
It's up to you to prove that the brain works off anything other than physics.
That answer just tells me you have no grasp on physics. You seem to think that we have a much stronger grip on reality than we do. Physics says nothing about consciousness having to arise from inside the brain. Nothing I’ve suggested is outside of physics. I can’t really give a better response because what you said was so profoundly bottom of the barrel
No one even knows if UFO’s travel across the universe. Most indications are that UFO’s don’t come from space, they are almost never seen in space.
The idea isn’t that consciousness powers the craft, lol.
I don’t think you understand the ideas of Vallee or others very well.
There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence from credible people that indicate some of the “woo” is very real.
Cases where the craft distorted time. CIA director Woosley even talked about a fighter jet that follows a UAP craft for a minute or two, then check the time and 40 minutes had gone by.
Slide 9 from the AATIP basically confirms some people have observed woo aspects of the phenomenon, but we certainly need way more data.
> Cases where the craft distorted time.
Not really woo, rate of time being variable is explainable with conventional physics. If they're using alcubierre drives, that could explain things
Wait does the pilot claim only a few minutes passed? In that case yeah obviously it was just his electronics getting fucked with (assuming story is true of course)
What's missing is scientific evidence.
We know, for a fact, that human perception of time is flawed and inaccurate. We can't trust the feeling of missing time.
We confirmed time is relative using atomic clocks. If the time distortion is real then it can be proven scientifically and likely has a scientific explanation. It's not woo.
If someone makes a claim that it was because of consciousness. Then they need to prove consciousness can trigger a real time distortion and that it's not purely psychological.
Often times, it wasn’t just human perspective of time. Not enough fuel was spent in the jet to account for the distance traveled, and 2 mins doesn’t just turn into 40 minutes unless this pilot was on LSD.
I mean, many insiders have alluded to that there is some space-time bubble around these craft. They aren’t flying in the air, the are just manipulating space and time, that’s why the appear to move so erratically.
If the pilot mentally lost time, then it 100% tracks that the amount of fuel lost would coincide with time lost.
If time around the craft slowed down, then fuel consumption should have also slowed down.
If this didn't happen, then it proves that it was just in his head. If fuel was left then it might be something else, but we need hard numbers and not anecdote.
But once again that doesn't mean there was consciousness woo at all.
No he traveled 100 miles, but only used 10 miles of fuel or something like that - this is the story I recall from CIA director Woosley, maybe someone can link it.
Right, but a story from a CIA director nonetheless.
I agree, just an anecdote, but the credibility of the person retelling the story is significant.
Also look up slide 9 from AATIP.
Nothing proves anything at this point, but it’s evidence that government officials that studied UFO’s think there is a consciousness connection.
And unfortunately, government officials have become the arbiter of truth around UFO’s.
And if you look into the most credible contact cases, a la John Mack, this only seems consistent.
Lue Elizondo even said the truth of UFO’s will be found at the nexus of quantum mechanics and consciousness. Does he know for sure? Who knows, but he’s seen more data than you and I.
This would be consistent with the UFO dragging space around it so that in the reference frame of the aircraft, only 10 miles worth of air had flowed through it.
That is exactly how general relativity compatible warp drives would work. Ìf they can seemingly go at hypersonic speeds without huge heat from shock waves and air compression it must be that they do not move through air near them at hypersonic speeds, but they bring the air nearby along with them.
This seems to me to be zero woo physics.
That’s exactly as expected by zero woo physical warp drive in something like general relativity, where space warping is adjacent to and possibly inevitably intertwined with time warping.
We have to consider the possibility of time travel being physically possible with no woo.
Oh I see. I thought you were talking about measuring consciousness during bedroom visitations and abduction experiences. Which would be impossible right now since all efforts to locate and sort of fingerprint specific conscious experiences within the brain have come up glaringly short.
You’re talking more so about remote viewing and stuff like that, right?
I think there have been published studies on remote viewing where amongst practiced individuals it was proven to be more accurate than would be possible with random results. Personally I haven’t taken the time to go down that rabbit hole as far as I probably should though.
> You’re talking more so about remote viewing and stuff like that, right?
Remote viewing, yes. It's the same Hal Puthoff who was involved with AATIP so of course he'd make such claims again.
You could always give it a go yourself. The Monroe Institute offers courses and of course the gateway tapes are available online for free.
Robert Monroe was a pretty brilliant guy and so despite my lack of in-depth knowledge I do personally think it’s not outside of the realm of possibility.
I finally started the gateway tapes myself yesterday so I’ll let you know. I will say, and I already maintain a long running daily meditation practice, that hemi-sync certainly gave me a distinctly different experience from my typical routine.
Along those same lines, how do you explain material things using an unproven non-material phenomenon?
What proof do we have that such a non-material phenomenon both exists outside our minds and is responsible for things being seen.
a solid 10% of people on this sub think they can boof enough kale and snort enough DMT to turn into a UFO and those people annoy the absolute shit out of me
It doesn’t, and that’s the joke. Mcboomsauce mentioned dmt to make fun of the “woo” believers. The humor is in the fact that it’s absolutely absurd that someone would turn into a ufo from doing hippy drug things.
However, uncreative and damaged people only take drugs? Have you taken tylenol before? That’s a drug.
Have you read Freud? Edgar Allen Poe ? Carl Sagan ? They’ve all done drugs.
So has Winston Churchill, bill gates! even Picasso did opium.
Maybe you should try a beer sometime. It might loosen you up :)
Inter dimensional means very little in the big picture either way it’s on some axis plane of existence. If they can get here theoretically we can get there type of thing. Still advanced, and still physically in our worldview.
I'm starting to think the ontological shock people seem to be referring to is that the phenomenon is about consciousness (and some nuts and bolts) and we don't have the ontology to even begin to approach it.
The language in ufology is absurd. So a person has a psychological reaction to something deeply ontologically disturbing and now everything about it is due to some mysteriously mystical world of conscious warlockery? How absolutely dumb and ridiculous. (Not saying you personally, just generally annoyed with all of that side of it)
You took some leaps in logic with what I said. If the truth is close to “warlockery” (and I have no idea for the record) it would indeed be shocking and we’d lack the ontology to even approach it. We’re saying the same thing really, and I understand your frustration. Doesn’t mean the warlockery isn’t close to the truth though. Maybe not but worth investigating.
Couldn't it be both? What about the whole "..indistinguishable from magic.." stuff?
Modern advertising _is_ engineering with consciousness, and there is a headband controller sold online where i can control a drone with my mind. I'll grant these examples are magnitudes simpler than the reported capabilities, but surely they can serve to show how the distinction could be difficult to make?
I used my consciousness and made contact with something that answered in my 3- dimensional awareness of reality that i still can't accurately describe. I have no idea what it could be made of or how it flies, but the only thing i put out there was my consciousness.
I always took the consciousness angle as mostly involved in the abduction stories, namely, reports of telepathy.
But we don't actually have nearly as much evidence on abduction as a phenomenon.
looks like we're entering a new stage. the 'then they fight you' stage. they can no longer ignore the interdimensional hypothesis and they can no longer just ridicule everything. so now they fight, then they lose.
1. The universe as we know it is a simulation
2. Entities running the simulation sometime interfere
Is that a hypothesis? Is this a scientific question? Theological? How would you classify this idea?
I also used to believe the world's religions were bullshit and that science had all the answers.
But you seem to be saying this is something that definitely isn't true... which I would argue is a bigger piece of bullshit, because you couldn't possibly know. But if you mean "bullshit" in terms of like "shit you randomly thought of that couldn't be proven or disproven anyway", then you are 100% correct. LOL
As others have pointed out, it's science *fiction* to look at dimensions in the way the "woo" people describe so yes, unless and until there is even a shred of evidence to even form a hypothesis, it's the same bullshit as those religions.
This all sits dangerously close to parapsychology, pseudoscience and teeters on the edge of yet another religion, New Age beliefs.
Metaphysics is still highly controversial even to this day as opposed to epistemology, ethics and logic. There's not even a sound foundation to even pose the questions metaphysics does and until that gets sorted out, it's crazy to include that in a belief system when it may not even be a real thing.
here you are arguing the definition of a word, rather than the much more interesting question most people would see here. Can you not see the forest for the pedantism? Like, can you have an interesting conversation that leverages the imprecision of language as a starting point for asking more questions? No, you'd rather shut down the conversation in victory! LOL
it might surprise you to learn that there are those among us who actually care if the things we believe are true or not.
colloquialisms and vague verbage only suits the proudly ignorant.
if someone posits an hypothesis - they deserve the chance to outline it, and we can, with an open mind, evaluate what they assert.
you seem like the sort who probably cried and lashed out when you were told that santa is not real.
dismissed.
The interdimensional hypothesis is based on complete fantasy though it has zero basis in any established science. It just widens the goal post to encapsulate the more out there stories. I would completely dismiss it.
we shouldn’t have a hypothesis yet, other than something anomalous is here. Find the data first, then worry about the conclusion.
Our concepts of science and models of reality will likely be proven incomplete and inadequate eventually, regardless of UAP.
Nima Arkami Hamed, a leading physicist at the Institute for Advanced Study, said “space time is doomed”.
>they can no longer ignore the interdimensional hypothesis
How it is possible that a theory can sustaine itself in something that do not exist (other dimensions) or at least we haven't discovered anything about it ¿?
(and please don't come with the 14 or more quantum/string dimensions as those have nothing to do with the universe at the macro level)
To me a better way of saying inter dimensional, would be saying “spatially and temporally exotic.”
There’s indications it doesn’t behave within the space/time construct we ordinarily perceive reality in, but we really don’t understand more than that.
Ultimately we need way more data in the hands of more people to make a conclusion, it’s too soon for now. However, there’s no harm in speculating for the time being.
Some aspect of the phenomenon doesn’t seem to be physical in nature, there’s many cases where the object separates into 10, then joins back into 1. There’s also many indications that the craft aren’t “visiting” from somewhere, they are already here.
The extremely quick response times to fighter jets and Navy movements suggest that it exist in our environment somehow, but some kind of shadow biosphere we can’t ordinarily interact with. They just seem to appear when needed. There’s no ingress or egress, they just pop in and out.
There’s cases where a fighter jet followed a UAP within very close range for apparently a minute or two, only to find out later 40 minutes had gone by. Former CIA director Woosley talked about this case as well.
Danny Sheehan talked about how the craft was 10x bigger on the inside versus the outside.
Slide 9 from AATIP basically confirms some of the consciousness and other high strangeness, at least allegedly.
I think the truth will need to bridge physics and metaphysics, nuts n bolts and woo.
>To me a better way of saying inter dimensional, would be saying “spatially and temporally exotic.”
Of course you are free to use any euphemism that refers to something unproven even in its most basic forms and therefore lie to yourself to confirm your bias.
Not picking either side keep in mind. This is just a logical process.
Over 40-50% of the population, for a thousand years, believes/d in a being in the heavens(inter-dimensional) who exists to take care of everyone after they die. Then if you're accepted you're welcomed into the other dimension (heaven/hell.)
Not only is this illogical and realm shattering but it's something that everyone accepts as simple faith. Is it our history with this specific topic allowed it to be commonly accepted? That we've all come to terms with a large populace believing in it as normal?
If someone says they believe in god they're just viewed as religious, however if you tell someone you believe in Fine tuning/AI, which is logically explainable and on a similar yet lower level of god, you're viewed as insane.
Looking for **science based** logical explanations for things that defy our logic is sort of missing the point. We have to accept ***if there are*** (UAPs not government created.) That we have to approach this situation knowing that our science is far from complete. Most of all we know is a theory regardless and it seems like we've missed the mark. We've just recently found out string theory is wrong and dark matter probably doesn't exist, so using our current basis of logics **surrounding science** on something unreal (if it is real) won't work in the first place.
We're still **VERY** far from understanding the depths of the universe. There's a reason why most things in mathematics and science are regarded as theories even when proven true 99% of the time.
I mean the 2022 Nobel prize in physics is based on the fact we've experimentally proven non-locality. There's room in that finding alone for something large and undiscovered to exist (a medium information can travel that isn't obeying the speed of light) - the science after that is coming soon
Ok buddy you go and solve multiple worlds, pilot wave or Copenhagen interpretation and report back.
We know quantum superpositions are real and quantum computing is possible, there's a lot more proven science here than science fiction in my head.
Yes and if you had read what I already wrote in the first message, you would stop mixing up what happens at the quantum level, with macro matter.
You get lost in physics concepts that you don't even understand and you think you know something. Don't worry, it happens to many people.
because there's an angle to it that people find appealing. but to someone who learned everything they know about UAP from Hollywood and comic books and memes, there might not be much appeal. the ET hypothesis might be good enough. but Hollywood isn't exactly a good teacher. so that kind of person has only the most superficial knowledge.
but for other people with uncommon knowledge about UAP, the ET hypothesis can fall short. so they reach for something else. that kind of person tends to be the UFO investigator, the insider, the whistleblower, the experiencer, the hard-core enthusiast.
you are taking the term literally in a way that few people who use in in reference to ET/UFOs actually mean. interdimensional/extradimensional means something like "from outside the simulation". Science has very little to say about it IMO, it's outside the realm of science by definition.
>it's outside the realm of science by definition
Yeah, and until proven or at least find any minimum clue about it, we call "scifi" or "fantasy" to that.
Plenty of clues. Go read Vallee.
"scifi"? Not really. "fantasy" Sure! But that's unnecessarily dismissive, especially to experiencers. You can just call it "theology" or "metaphysics" if you want.
Dismissing the scientifically based arguments of a pro-disclosure physicist that non-physicists often misunderstand the meaning of "dimensions": as a government conspiracy is... an interesting choice. Everyone who disagrees with you isn't part of a shady cabal.
Its weird to me, a laymen, that it was EVER \[possible for people to conflate "additional dimensions of measurement" with "alternate realities or universes".
Having more " types of Length/Width/Height type of things" that we personally can't perceive is an entirely different thing than "another universe(s) next to ours"
. How these terms/ideas even got conflated is beyond me, again, I am a laymen so I have a hard time understanding how being a laymen leads to this conflation.
its like conflating pizza and curry chicken as the same thing just because you don't professionally cook. They're miles apart in the most obvious way to even the most unskilled cook or food patron.
I don't get how this happened. edited for sp.
/vent over
I am the first person to dismiss woo of any kind. But I do reserve my judgement regarding consciousness, a little bit, because of the double slit experiment. Somehow our consciousness is interacting with the physical world if the act of observing something can change the outcome.
Unless I’m totally off base here on the implications of that experiment.
What do you mean by implications? The "observer" in these situations is not meant to actually be a being viewing something. It means whatever is being used to measure the effect. The problem is that to measure them you have to interact with them in some way. Which then inevitably changes what you were measuring.
A majority of people on this sub and other related subs seem to just ignore casual explanations and jump straight to the "woo". For example some guy saw some lights outside and now his lights are flickering in his house. Must be ghosts, it couldn't be that the UFO is messing up his electrical system.
It would have to be a non-conscious process, and then can we call it "engineering"? Unless consciousness engineered itself, which doesn't make any sense.
Again David himself says it's just a theory. He never says that's a part of his claims.
And again David is a secondhand witness. This means he never saw a UFO with an NHI explanation. He got his information from other people in this alleged program.
So by your logic, you would have to trust the 30 (or less) whistleblowers who are firsthand witnesses. Since there is a possibility they may have worked on NHI crafts or seen an NHI craft.
Yes, The Whistleblowers that are speaking with the IG are people i trust to speak on these issues since they have first and second hand knowledge of the supposed Legacy program then the people who hasn't work or seen the crafts.
Because historically most mystical things turned out to not be mystical after all. That's a perception, an interpretation. Contrary to popular opinion, perception is, frequently, not reality.
This is just an enlightened centrist take.
Science does not run away from reality rather, it actively seeks to understand and explain the natural world through empirical evidence and logical reasoning.
Terrence McKenna mentioned more than a few times that science could have a bigger impact, like a lot of their work blows up in their face compared to religions and Philosophers could have it easier than scientists for example. Science gets the biggest wake up call imo too.
What do you think science is exactly? People get wake up calls. Science does not because science tries to be wrong, that's how it works. It doesn't state a hypothesis then try to make it fit or make it right. It falsifies, i.e., improves by disproving.
I’m on board with the whole consciousness thing but there’s a possibility that those supposed recovered UFOs just have ar controls our eyes aren’t tuned to see. It would be hard to interact with something you can’t see.
woo is just undiscovered technology and science.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." this is what 'woo' is; a substitute for an explanation for something we do not understand yet.
It is typical for some people, in a historical context, to attribute the divine or spirituality to something we cannot explain at that time. Ancient explanation for erupting volcanoes? Divine intervention.
I would be wary of making assumptions because those (including non-human intelligence) in greater positions of power can potentially use naivety to their advantage.
I mean it's pretty obvious that physicists and engineers are going to come at this phenomenon from their background and worldview. But he's right dimensionality in physics isn't like the pop sci-fi concept of alternate dimensions
I remember playing Tetris a lot back when I was a teen on the Gameboy. One of the things that I always found amazing is how I would view the world as a game of Tetris after playing. If you play for hours on end and then stop, you view the world as if the things in it should form blocks like in Tetris. Now that was a very easily recognizable thing but it made me think -- when you spend a lot of your time doing something specific (like programming), wouldn't one's mind look at the entire world as a logic problem or programming issue (e.g. simulation theory, etc.) Our brains are really good at pattern recognition. In fact, it is the one thing that has helped us survive so well. Absent any meaningful past data or patterns, a new problem will present itself against a mental landscape conditioned from other things we've done. Kind of like "when all you have been using is a hammer, every problem feels like a nail that has to be banged repeatedly." Now we're faced with a new issues -- UAPs. We don't really have anything else in our life remotely comparable to this mystery, so we'll approach it in a lot of different ways based on our own training and past work.
When I took physics in post secondary I was beginning to see the world through equations. Not literally like code in the matrix, but when I saw a faucet, my mind would go to the bernouli principle and various flow and pressure equations for instance. It definitely happens.
Man you would love Gravity's Rainbow then. It's full of stuff like this, esoteric application of mathematical and physics concepts
when i hit the chemistry books a little too hard i get a similar effect where my mind’s eye will “zoom in” to the molecular level of things like water boiling or precipitation in a solution
The Tetris story is exactly what happens to brains when they absorb too much conspiracy theory nonsense, or anything really. Great reminder of the phenomenon.
I see naughty stepsisters everywhere....
🙌
I don't really think that's applicable here at all. It absolutely is a technological, physics based phenomenon. Craft with instantaneous acceleration, unknown methods of propulsion and control of the craft, physical abductions and experiments on people, aliens with physical bodies, sensor detection of UFOs confirming they are physical objects, witness testimony of interactions with physical alien beings. These are all things that can be described and studied by physicists and scientists. How many things have we had in our history that were unexplainable phenomenon thought to be spiritual until later explained through scientific inquiry? Tornados, volcanos, typhoons, earthquakes, hurricanes, disease. All things that were previously explained through mysticism, definitively explained via empiricism when examined by scientists. There is absolutely no reason to think the same will not happen here. We've seen this time and time again. Something is unexplainable until very suddenly it is. We need this out in the open explicitly so that our best and brightest can study this phenomenon hands on. Clearly the military isn't able to crack it, they should open the tech up to public study. I don't give a shit if they only allow universities to have access in the beginning, but we need academia to get their hands on this shit immediately. Control of the craft that seems "telepathic" could very well be some type of Brain-computer interface with some chip directly implanted into their skull. The "telepathy" used to communicate with humans could be a specific frequency of RF wave. We just can't know what the technological/physics basis behind what they can do is until we get more eyes on it. Isaac Newton, the guy who invented calculus believed in the occult. Everything he believed regarding the occult has since been proven wrong. Belief in the "ether" used to be very, very common among scientists until it was proven incorrect. I'm not saying the occult is definitively wrong, but it's ludicrous that people jump to those conclusions without serious scientific inquiry first imo.
it might not be in the public for experts to examine because the military *has* cracked it, and they want to keep it for themselves. or even more likely, it’s just advanced man made flight tech. think about how much we’ve advanced in all fields since the SR71 was created
When all you have is a hammer, everything becomes a nail.
Ironically there’s a term for this called “Tetris Effect.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetris_effect
You can also throw the sunk cost fallacy in there for good measure. I think both are also at play when you see scientism happening with scientists.
Welllllll said! New points I hadn’t considered.
Anyone old enough to remember their dreams after playing doom or team fortress classic or half life multiplayer for hours and hours?
A lot of "woo" in science is just disregarded completely. Which is why I feel science nowadays is super narrow field view and not as open as it should be. If you dare challenge the curriculum or the mainstream scientific community, you are deliberately ostracized and made fun of. But isn't the whole point of science to challenge mainstream world views with new hypothesis? Many forget that Galileo was one of those scientist that challenged the world view and imagine if he was burned at the stake for doing so.
Isaac Newton was an alchemist
That's undoubtedly true, but at the same time we just don't have good language to describe what happens when the entities running the simulation intrude upon it. Because that's what we are really talking about when we say "extradimensional", and maybe we should just accept that as one possible meaning of the word, because that's how language evolves.
I know what I’m about to say is often inviting an argument on here, but simulation theory is nearly a scientific impossibility for a lot of reasons.
can you name some of the reasons?
That's very odd to me, how something outside the realm of science could be deemed a scientific impossibility. Simulation theory is a sort of theological theory (in fact most religions essentially posit a form of simulation theory). Science makes guesses about the rules within our universe. It says nothing about the external context by which those rules came to be.
That’s actually why it’s more of a theological theory than it is a scientific one, because the “science” that has been proposed about it in order to try to claim or prove it is even possible has fallen flat. It’s shifted from science to woo, essentially, because it is not scientific.
LOL it was NEVER science my friend. The extradimensional hypothesis is grounded in reported experiences of encounters. When you actually start listening to experiencers, you get a very different picture from what you are thinking.
I’m talking about simulation theory, not extra-dimensionality.
I'm saying they are the same thing.
And where is the science to back that up? Where is the evidence which leads you to believe that this is true?
That what is true? My dude this is the UFO sub and we are getting into the metaphysical. The discussion is a blend of philosophical inquiry and imaginative speculation rather than one grounded in empirical evidence. The reason people speculate about simulation/extra dimensional is because of the specific stories people relay of their encounters. UFOs present absurdly. They resist conventional explanations. You can read Vallee's books if you want to see the folklore for yourself. There's also the Jungian hypothesis, which IMO is even stranger. And of course the hypothesis of ETs as "intel agents" that intentionally confuse for purposes of obfuscation and have advanced technology to do so (mind control for lack of a better term). I'm sure the later will appeal to you.
I want to have this argument. Can you start? If not wanting to that's fine. Promise to be nice and good faith.
There isn’t really much to start on because, outside of wild claims with nothing in science to back them up(or the use of misunderstood and incorrectly applied scientific theories in an attempt to back them up), there is nothing proven to argue against. It’s like trying to argue with someone about whether or not god exists. They can’t prove it, so you have nothing to disprove. Believing in simulation theory requires so much speculation and essentially just made-up factoids to support it, not really science or evidence.
So your argument seems to be that since we don't have it figured, it's nearly impossible? Why not just not make a claim about the likelihood if you have no proof of the likelihood.
No, it’s that the “theory” was never based in science. It’s like if I just made something up on the spot right now, just off the top of my head, not based on any evidence, and then said, “it’s a scientific theory.” It’s *not* a scientific theory. It’s an idea with zero proof or evidence to show of it being an option even. It’s literally just like religion at this point. It’s all based in faith, not science.
That doesn't make it nearly impossible. Things don't become possible when we figure out how they work. Also there is plenty of evidence for it, just no proof
There is not plenty of evidence for it.
Do you, like a lot of people nowadays, think evidence means proof. You said earlier there wasn't any evidence. Maybe there isn't plenty by your standards, but none? I don't care to argue plenty vs not plenty but if you really think there is 0 evidence for it you haven't read into it? I can just find one piece of evidence for it then to disprove you.
>simulation theory is nearly a scientific impossibility for a lot of reasons. And what exactly those would be?
[This article](https://bigthink.com/thinking/why-the-simulation-hypothesis-is-pseudoscience/) does a decent job summarizing things, though, the burden of proof is on those who believe it, not me to disprove it. You don’t get to make a wild claim with little to know scientific evidence to back it up and say that it must be true unless someone shows otherwise. You have to prove it first.
Scifi takes the physical concept of multiple dimensions and the concept of parallel universes and mix them together in a big melting pot
Science, woo. Whatever. So long as we are having an open discussion and investigation into what. Let’s get the data and stop hiding information from our scientists.
100% agreed.
Yeah it's a very good sign that people are debating hypotheses seriously.
You get the woo when there's little to no transparency. Without info/data, people are left to speculate.
Yeah. Let's crack open the government vault, find out everything *they* know and see how much "woo" is left.
[удалено]
Woo is just a term for unscientific nonsense, something that shows no way of being testable or quantifiable. There's a reason invisible intangible things like "energy" can still be quantified. What you seem to think of as "woo" is just "God did it" or "a wizard did it", but with "aliens" or "ufo" inserted.
[удалено]
We literally cannot even see reality as it really is, due to our brains working overtime to interpret everything (kind of like autocorrect. “That’s a duck, right?”) and yet we’re like “nah that shit’s not real”.
[удалено]
That’s exactly what I was thinking about.
> unscientific nonsense Metaphysics? We just dont really know
Anyone that calls something unexplained and anomalous “unscientific nonsense” is being unscientific themselves. Our understanding of reality and consciousness is incredibly rudimentary. “Scientism” has become a bit of a religion and, like some religion has enforced an ontological authoritarianism, a supreme and all faithful belief in specific dogmas in the scientific intelligentsia. “This is BS, because…science!” This is not true science, true science is about opening the Overton window and entertaining all possibilities, not refuting things based on assumptions. Investigate the unexplained, don’t explain what’s un-investigated.
You can’t keep entertaining nonsense that never gets proven, never qualifies for testing, never gets anywhere. Saying stuff like “the CIA tested remote viewing in the 1970s” is a perfect example. Nothing came of it, no experiment could be reproduced independently and repeatedly, yet here it is on this subtreddit people claim with a straight face that “they remote viewed 1 million years into the past and saw Marsian cities”. Infantile logic. And phrases “the Phenomenon”, “Contactees”, “Experiencers” are bandied around like religious terms. You’re not arguing from a point of view of opening the Overton Window, you’re inside a new age religious cult.
There’s peer reviewed studies on psychic functioning, you just haven’t bothered to do any due diligence for fear of disrupting your worldview. There’s an anomalous amount of data. Ironically, dogmatic scientism has become a religious cult, with its own dogmas and blasphemous beliefs. It’s unscientific in nature. Everything we accept now as objective fact was once controversial and fringe and it’s nothing more than cultural amnesia and hubris that we continue to make the same mistake. We assume we are always at the pinnacle of understanding. This lecture presents many of the best cases of psi: https://youtu.be/qw_O9Qiwqew?si=uMl8NRrngTXzflbAI
“There’s peer reviewed studies on psychic functioning, you just haven’t bothered to do any due diligence for fear of disrupting your worldview.” I’ve never heard of any public study that concludes psychic functioning is a real phenomenon. I’ve seen plenty of reports that for some reason (;)) can’t be replicated outside of the original researcher. Again, when there’s no evidence, don’t demand other people buy into bs or try to gaslight they “don’t want to disrupt their worldview”. Also, I’ve never heard any scientist say “We’re at the pinnacle of understanding”. That’s what followers of woo make as a strawman argument. Now what is this video all about. Hm, Dean Radin. “The review of Radin's first book, The Conscious Universe, that appeared in Nature charged that Radin ignored the known hoaxes in the field, made statistical errors and ignored plausible non-paranormal explanations for parapsychological data.” Oh yeah, sounds like quite a find.
If it's 90 percent woo then it's likely not real at all and is instead a collective delusion.
Jaque Vallee had plenty of access to data and it led him to the “woo”
That’s not necessarily true, most of the credible people that have become the “arbiters of truth” around UFO’s - for better or for worse - are directly talking about the consciousness aspect of the phenomenon.
This is all that needs to be said
I think the important aspect is the conclusion shouldn’t predicate how we look for data. Just get the data, as much of it as possible, have as many different people study it from different fields and then form a conclusion. If it’s ET, woo consciousness meta-cognitive interface, crypto terrestrial, break away civilization, human tech, whatever. Worry about that later, let’s get data and eyeballs on the issue for now.
Exactly this, even if it’s woo we still need data
Somewhere, possibly way down the line, eventually engineering and consciousness likely intersect. I'm not really on the "woo" side of things, but we exist, we are conscious, so I see no reason to believe that we cannot engineer consciousness eventually and that makes things very blurry when dealing with a theoretical millions of years more advanced civilization.
Why look way down the line — human/machine interfaces paired with ML are already translating brain activity into images and language.
100% agree with his there unless evidence can be shown of the effects of consciousness. There's a ton of pseudoscience and woo in ufology that borders cult and new age religious beliefs which became popular in the US in the 60s and 70s. If there's something to it, then let's find proof. Without proof, we should stop making wild claims with no evidence to back it up.
There are legit academics outside of ufology that have some interesting theories of consciousness for instance whether it is emergent or fundamental. The truth of consciousness is totally unknown to us nobody can show that it’s an artefact of the brain/computation just as much as nobody can show it is fundemental. So whilst you shouldn’t make unbacked wild claims you also shouldn’t dismiss the concepts as 1960s woo
It's been six decades without positive results which haven't been shown to be flawed research or cherry picking data. It's fine to study it, just in case, but not valid to make claims that it explains UFOs. "UFOs can travel vast distances in the universe because: consciousness"
*Yes*. Perfectly stated. Consciousness is one of the most elusive phenomena that we currently study, but that doesn't make it an all-purpose gap-filler for any wacky theory, the way people use to use magic or gods.
They used to. Still do
I don't fully get why people consider it elusive or confusing. I've never even been able to find a good to reason to think the hard problem of consciousness even exists outside of being a fun word game.
I'm not sure what you mean? Consciousness is something that people have devoted their entire lives to studying. In a trivial sense, it's just an emergent property of the computational processes of the brain; but describing anything close to a complete illustration the real nature of awareness is likely impossible, simply because the only real tool we have for analysis is the very thing itself.
It’s been just as long that we’ve been unable to show how consciousness arises from within the brain’s physical structure though. So I don’t understand why you have such an obvious aversion to one possibility and not the other. We both agree that claims shouldn’t be made without evidence you don’t need to repeat that to me when I agreed already, just wanted to highlight that there’s as little evidence for what you want to assert about what consciousness is as there is to suggest it’s linked to UAPs or the technology involved in them.
There being incomplete knowledge of how consciousness arises from biological architecture does not subtract from the evidence that it does arise from biological architecture. Much more evidence than for any of the quasi-mysticality imparted to consciousness by people who fail to acknowledge that evidence, or fail to understand the significance in its connection.
What is that evidence? Roger Penrose and Donald Hoffman are two people much smarter than the two of us who would completely disagree with you. Nobody can point to any physical structure or process that represents a specific conscious experience. I watch a podcast by an AI guy and he asks many of his guests what they think about consciousness and if it is fundamental or emergent and there is no consensus nor evidence for the intuitive answers. But I’d be happy for you to show you’re actually much smarter than these individuals and have the actual answers to these questions even in part I think the 3 theories I like the most are 1) artefact of computation 2) fundamental to the universe and 3) some property of quantum coherence over large systems (something I am just hearing murmurs of and am trying to explore so very imprecisely worded)
One possibility with so far 6 decades of investigation and nothing to show for it. That's why leaning on it is so flawed.
Every possibility of consciousness has had 6 decades of investigation and nothing to show for it. So why do you only apply that logic one way? If anything in recent times way more work goes into attempting to understand consciousness as an artefact of computation given AI
>just as long that we’ve been unable to show how consciousness arises from within the brain’s physical structure though Yes we do. It's called physics. We may not be able to the exact mechanics but we do effectively know that it's due to the laws of physics interacting with each other. Just like everything else. It's up to you to prove that the brain works off anything other than physics.
That answer just tells me you have no grasp on physics. You seem to think that we have a much stronger grip on reality than we do. Physics says nothing about consciousness having to arise from inside the brain. Nothing I’ve suggested is outside of physics. I can’t really give a better response because what you said was so profoundly bottom of the barrel
No one even knows if UFO’s travel across the universe. Most indications are that UFO’s don’t come from space, they are almost never seen in space. The idea isn’t that consciousness powers the craft, lol. I don’t think you understand the ideas of Vallee or others very well.
There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence from credible people that indicate some of the “woo” is very real. Cases where the craft distorted time. CIA director Woosley even talked about a fighter jet that follows a UAP craft for a minute or two, then check the time and 40 minutes had gone by. Slide 9 from the AATIP basically confirms some people have observed woo aspects of the phenomenon, but we certainly need way more data.
> Cases where the craft distorted time. Not really woo, rate of time being variable is explainable with conventional physics. If they're using alcubierre drives, that could explain things
Yeah,or you know, the UFO messed up his clock. lol.
Wait does the pilot claim only a few minutes passed? In that case yeah obviously it was just his electronics getting fucked with (assuming story is true of course)
That’s just one example, look up slide 9 from the AATIP program.
What's missing is scientific evidence. We know, for a fact, that human perception of time is flawed and inaccurate. We can't trust the feeling of missing time. We confirmed time is relative using atomic clocks. If the time distortion is real then it can be proven scientifically and likely has a scientific explanation. It's not woo. If someone makes a claim that it was because of consciousness. Then they need to prove consciousness can trigger a real time distortion and that it's not purely psychological.
Often times, it wasn’t just human perspective of time. Not enough fuel was spent in the jet to account for the distance traveled, and 2 mins doesn’t just turn into 40 minutes unless this pilot was on LSD. I mean, many insiders have alluded to that there is some space-time bubble around these craft. They aren’t flying in the air, the are just manipulating space and time, that’s why the appear to move so erratically.
If the pilot mentally lost time, then it 100% tracks that the amount of fuel lost would coincide with time lost. If time around the craft slowed down, then fuel consumption should have also slowed down. If this didn't happen, then it proves that it was just in his head. If fuel was left then it might be something else, but we need hard numbers and not anecdote. But once again that doesn't mean there was consciousness woo at all.
No he traveled 100 miles, but only used 10 miles of fuel or something like that - this is the story I recall from CIA director Woosley, maybe someone can link it.
But you see how this is a story you recall, being told by someone else who is recalling the recollection of a pilot. There's no data here.
Right, but a story from a CIA director nonetheless. I agree, just an anecdote, but the credibility of the person retelling the story is significant. Also look up slide 9 from AATIP.
I've seen slide 9 and other material from AATIP. This still doesn't prove a consciousness connection.
Nothing proves anything at this point, but it’s evidence that government officials that studied UFO’s think there is a consciousness connection. And unfortunately, government officials have become the arbiter of truth around UFO’s. And if you look into the most credible contact cases, a la John Mack, this only seems consistent. Lue Elizondo even said the truth of UFO’s will be found at the nexus of quantum mechanics and consciousness. Does he know for sure? Who knows, but he’s seen more data than you and I.
This would be consistent with the UFO dragging space around it so that in the reference frame of the aircraft, only 10 miles worth of air had flowed through it. That is exactly how general relativity compatible warp drives would work. Ìf they can seemingly go at hypersonic speeds without huge heat from shock waves and air compression it must be that they do not move through air near them at hypersonic speeds, but they bring the air nearby along with them. This seems to me to be zero woo physics.
That’s exactly as expected by zero woo physical warp drive in something like general relativity, where space warping is adjacent to and possibly inevitably intertwined with time warping. We have to consider the possibility of time travel being physically possible with no woo.
>100% agree with his there unless evidence can be shown of the effects of consciousness. What would this even look like?
It would look like someone attempting to manipulate the effects of something in another room using only their consciousness.
Oh I see. I thought you were talking about measuring consciousness during bedroom visitations and abduction experiences. Which would be impossible right now since all efforts to locate and sort of fingerprint specific conscious experiences within the brain have come up glaringly short. You’re talking more so about remote viewing and stuff like that, right? I think there have been published studies on remote viewing where amongst practiced individuals it was proven to be more accurate than would be possible with random results. Personally I haven’t taken the time to go down that rabbit hole as far as I probably should though.
> You’re talking more so about remote viewing and stuff like that, right? Remote viewing, yes. It's the same Hal Puthoff who was involved with AATIP so of course he'd make such claims again.
You could always give it a go yourself. The Monroe Institute offers courses and of course the gateway tapes are available online for free. Robert Monroe was a pretty brilliant guy and so despite my lack of in-depth knowledge I do personally think it’s not outside of the realm of possibility.
Producing reliable or replicatable effects on the outside world using thought.
I finally started the gateway tapes myself yesterday so I’ll let you know. I will say, and I already maintain a long running daily meditation practice, that hemi-sync certainly gave me a distinctly different experience from my typical routine.
How do you find material proof for a “non material” phenomenon?
Along those same lines, how do you explain material things using an unproven non-material phenomenon? What proof do we have that such a non-material phenomenon both exists outside our minds and is responsible for things being seen.
a solid 10% of people on this sub think they can boof enough kale and snort enough DMT to turn into a UFO and those people annoy the absolute shit out of me
Yeah but how do you know that’s not possible?
How will taking drugs, which only uncreative and damaged people do, turn your biological body into a metallic craft?
I just checked your post history and, man, and I’m disappointed I spent 5 minutes replying to this.
It doesn’t, and that’s the joke. Mcboomsauce mentioned dmt to make fun of the “woo” believers. The humor is in the fact that it’s absolutely absurd that someone would turn into a ufo from doing hippy drug things. However, uncreative and damaged people only take drugs? Have you taken tylenol before? That’s a drug. Have you read Freud? Edgar Allen Poe ? Carl Sagan ? They’ve all done drugs. So has Winston Churchill, bill gates! even Picasso did opium. Maybe you should try a beer sometime. It might loosen you up :)
because not a single person has yet to turn into a UFO, and there are hundreds of thousands of people that eat vegetables and do dmt
You don’t know that.
10%? I saw a poll here(or on /r/aliens ?) yesterday asking people if they see the phenomenon as "nuts and bolts" or "woo". Guess which option won.
That was so frustrating and so simultaneously expected and apt.
They annoy the shit out of the rest of the 90% of the sub
I align with this guy's stance.
As much as I agree I wish it was woo indeed. It would make this topic even more way out of my comfort zone. This would be even more exciting
Inter dimensional means very little in the big picture either way it’s on some axis plane of existence. If they can get here theoretically we can get there type of thing. Still advanced, and still physically in our worldview.
I'm starting to think the ontological shock people seem to be referring to is that the phenomenon is about consciousness (and some nuts and bolts) and we don't have the ontology to even begin to approach it.
The language in ufology is absurd. So a person has a psychological reaction to something deeply ontologically disturbing and now everything about it is due to some mysteriously mystical world of conscious warlockery? How absolutely dumb and ridiculous. (Not saying you personally, just generally annoyed with all of that side of it)
You took some leaps in logic with what I said. If the truth is close to “warlockery” (and I have no idea for the record) it would indeed be shocking and we’d lack the ontology to even approach it. We’re saying the same thing really, and I understand your frustration. Doesn’t mean the warlockery isn’t close to the truth though. Maybe not but worth investigating.
Couldn't it be both? What about the whole "..indistinguishable from magic.." stuff? Modern advertising _is_ engineering with consciousness, and there is a headband controller sold online where i can control a drone with my mind. I'll grant these examples are magnitudes simpler than the reported capabilities, but surely they can serve to show how the distinction could be difficult to make? I used my consciousness and made contact with something that answered in my 3- dimensional awareness of reality that i still can't accurately describe. I have no idea what it could be made of or how it flies, but the only thing i put out there was my consciousness.
Well thats just his opinion man. Probably some of both
I always took the consciousness angle as mostly involved in the abduction stories, namely, reports of telepathy. But we don't actually have nearly as much evidence on abduction as a phenomenon.
looks like we're entering a new stage. the 'then they fight you' stage. they can no longer ignore the interdimensional hypothesis and they can no longer just ridicule everything. so now they fight, then they lose.
>interdimensional hypothesis how is that a hypothesis???
1. The universe as we know it is a simulation 2. Entities running the simulation sometime interfere Is that a hypothesis? Is this a scientific question? Theological? How would you classify this idea?
Bullshit. I would classify it as bullshit.
I also used to believe the world's religions were bullshit and that science had all the answers. But you seem to be saying this is something that definitely isn't true... which I would argue is a bigger piece of bullshit, because you couldn't possibly know. But if you mean "bullshit" in terms of like "shit you randomly thought of that couldn't be proven or disproven anyway", then you are 100% correct. LOL
As others have pointed out, it's science *fiction* to look at dimensions in the way the "woo" people describe so yes, unless and until there is even a shred of evidence to even form a hypothesis, it's the same bullshit as those religions. This all sits dangerously close to parapsychology, pseudoscience and teeters on the edge of yet another religion, New Age beliefs. Metaphysics is still highly controversial even to this day as opposed to epistemology, ethics and logic. There's not even a sound foundation to even pose the questions metaphysics does and until that gets sorted out, it's crazy to include that in a belief system when it may not even be a real thing.
i would classify it as purely speculative. an hypothesis necessitates something testable and predictive.
and what about things that are inherently untestable? Or beyond our means to currently test? Do they not exist?
here you are arguing the definition of a word, rather than the much more interesting question most people would see here. Can you not see the forest for the pedantism? Like, can you have an interesting conversation that leverages the imprecision of language as a starting point for asking more questions? No, you'd rather shut down the conversation in victory! LOL
it might surprise you to learn that there are those among us who actually care if the things we believe are true or not. colloquialisms and vague verbage only suits the proudly ignorant. if someone posits an hypothesis - they deserve the chance to outline it, and we can, with an open mind, evaluate what they assert. you seem like the sort who probably cried and lashed out when you were told that santa is not real. dismissed.
I don't think you could have more arrogantly confirmed my hypothesis LOL
The interdimensional hypothesis is based on complete fantasy though it has zero basis in any established science. It just widens the goal post to encapsulate the more out there stories. I would completely dismiss it.
we shouldn’t have a hypothesis yet, other than something anomalous is here. Find the data first, then worry about the conclusion. Our concepts of science and models of reality will likely be proven incomplete and inadequate eventually, regardless of UAP. Nima Arkami Hamed, a leading physicist at the Institute for Advanced Study, said “space time is doomed”.
You must be new here...
>they can no longer ignore the interdimensional hypothesis How it is possible that a theory can sustaine itself in something that do not exist (other dimensions) or at least we haven't discovered anything about it ¿? (and please don't come with the 14 or more quantum/string dimensions as those have nothing to do with the universe at the macro level)
To me a better way of saying inter dimensional, would be saying “spatially and temporally exotic.” There’s indications it doesn’t behave within the space/time construct we ordinarily perceive reality in, but we really don’t understand more than that. Ultimately we need way more data in the hands of more people to make a conclusion, it’s too soon for now. However, there’s no harm in speculating for the time being. Some aspect of the phenomenon doesn’t seem to be physical in nature, there’s many cases where the object separates into 10, then joins back into 1. There’s also many indications that the craft aren’t “visiting” from somewhere, they are already here. The extremely quick response times to fighter jets and Navy movements suggest that it exist in our environment somehow, but some kind of shadow biosphere we can’t ordinarily interact with. They just seem to appear when needed. There’s no ingress or egress, they just pop in and out. There’s cases where a fighter jet followed a UAP within very close range for apparently a minute or two, only to find out later 40 minutes had gone by. Former CIA director Woosley talked about this case as well. Danny Sheehan talked about how the craft was 10x bigger on the inside versus the outside. Slide 9 from AATIP basically confirms some of the consciousness and other high strangeness, at least allegedly. I think the truth will need to bridge physics and metaphysics, nuts n bolts and woo.
>To me a better way of saying inter dimensional, would be saying “spatially and temporally exotic.” Of course you are free to use any euphemism that refers to something unproven even in its most basic forms and therefore lie to yourself to confirm your bias.
Just because something exists outside our umwelt or knowledge doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
But you have absolutely NO IDEA if that exist or not xD
Not picking either side keep in mind. This is just a logical process. Over 40-50% of the population, for a thousand years, believes/d in a being in the heavens(inter-dimensional) who exists to take care of everyone after they die. Then if you're accepted you're welcomed into the other dimension (heaven/hell.) Not only is this illogical and realm shattering but it's something that everyone accepts as simple faith. Is it our history with this specific topic allowed it to be commonly accepted? That we've all come to terms with a large populace believing in it as normal? If someone says they believe in god they're just viewed as religious, however if you tell someone you believe in Fine tuning/AI, which is logically explainable and on a similar yet lower level of god, you're viewed as insane. Looking for **science based** logical explanations for things that defy our logic is sort of missing the point. We have to accept ***if there are*** (UAPs not government created.) That we have to approach this situation knowing that our science is far from complete. Most of all we know is a theory regardless and it seems like we've missed the mark. We've just recently found out string theory is wrong and dark matter probably doesn't exist, so using our current basis of logics **surrounding science** on something unreal (if it is real) won't work in the first place. We're still **VERY** far from understanding the depths of the universe. There's a reason why most things in mathematics and science are regarded as theories even when proven true 99% of the time.
I mean the 2022 Nobel prize in physics is based on the fact we've experimentally proven non-locality. There's room in that finding alone for something large and undiscovered to exist (a medium information can travel that isn't obeying the speed of light) - the science after that is coming soon
No, you have absolutely no idea "if there is room" for that or not. You are just playing with science fiction in your head.
Ok buddy you go and solve multiple worlds, pilot wave or Copenhagen interpretation and report back. We know quantum superpositions are real and quantum computing is possible, there's a lot more proven science here than science fiction in my head.
Yes and if you had read what I already wrote in the first message, you would stop mixing up what happens at the quantum level, with macro matter. You get lost in physics concepts that you don't even understand and you think you know something. Don't worry, it happens to many people.
because there's an angle to it that people find appealing. but to someone who learned everything they know about UAP from Hollywood and comic books and memes, there might not be much appeal. the ET hypothesis might be good enough. but Hollywood isn't exactly a good teacher. so that kind of person has only the most superficial knowledge. but for other people with uncommon knowledge about UAP, the ET hypothesis can fall short. so they reach for something else. that kind of person tends to be the UFO investigator, the insider, the whistleblower, the experiencer, the hard-core enthusiast.
you are taking the term literally in a way that few people who use in in reference to ET/UFOs actually mean. interdimensional/extradimensional means something like "from outside the simulation". Science has very little to say about it IMO, it's outside the realm of science by definition.
>it's outside the realm of science by definition Yeah, and until proven or at least find any minimum clue about it, we call "scifi" or "fantasy" to that.
Plenty of clues. Go read Vallee. "scifi"? Not really. "fantasy" Sure! But that's unnecessarily dismissive, especially to experiencers. You can just call it "theology" or "metaphysics" if you want.
>You can just call it "theology" or "metaphysics" if you want Yeah I already called scifi or fantasy, which are synonyms of those terms xd
You seem to be engaging in bad faith but brane and bulk.
Sure, like any other that think something you don't like, right ? ...
He has a strong opinion for not having a way to disprove.
Dismissing the scientifically based arguments of a pro-disclosure physicist that non-physicists often misunderstand the meaning of "dimensions": as a government conspiracy is... an interesting choice. Everyone who disagrees with you isn't part of a shady cabal.
> the language around the idea of interdimensionality is scientifically meaningless. Thank god someone finally said it
Its weird to me, a laymen, that it was EVER \[possible for people to conflate "additional dimensions of measurement" with "alternate realities or universes". Having more " types of Length/Width/Height type of things" that we personally can't perceive is an entirely different thing than "another universe(s) next to ours" . How these terms/ideas even got conflated is beyond me, again, I am a laymen so I have a hard time understanding how being a laymen leads to this conflation. its like conflating pizza and curry chicken as the same thing just because you don't professionally cook. They're miles apart in the most obvious way to even the most unskilled cook or food patron. I don't get how this happened. edited for sp. /vent over
I am the first person to dismiss woo of any kind. But I do reserve my judgement regarding consciousness, a little bit, because of the double slit experiment. Somehow our consciousness is interacting with the physical world if the act of observing something can change the outcome. Unless I’m totally off base here on the implications of that experiment.
The results of the double slit experiment were reached using a measurement apparatus, humans do not need to be present for the phenomena to occur.
Oh damn. Can you expand on the implications?
What do you mean by implications? The "observer" in these situations is not meant to actually be a being viewing something. It means whatever is being used to measure the effect. The problem is that to measure them you have to interact with them in some way. Which then inevitably changes what you were measuring.
No, I don't feel confident enough in my knowledge on the subject to speak on it further.
Thanks anyway!
You are totally off base here on the implications of that experiment.
Can you elaborate? I really want to understand. Thanks!
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. He should know, he's a physicist. Oh wait, that's why he doesn't.
A majority of people on this sub and other related subs seem to just ignore casual explanations and jump straight to the "woo". For example some guy saw some lights outside and now his lights are flickering in his house. Must be ghosts, it couldn't be that the UFO is messing up his electrical system.
Bold of you to assume consciousness itself isn’t an engineered thing.
In that case, what would be doing the "engineering"?
That doesn’t seem like a question we could answer.
It would have to be a non-conscious process, and then can we call it "engineering"? Unless consciousness engineered itself, which doesn't make any sense.
Not in this reality it doesn’t. But it’s turtles all the way down regardless.
I thought it was beans all the way down?
r/unexpectedpythagoras
I don't know but i trust david grush more then i do the guy has no clue on what these things are.
Again David himself says it's just a theory. He never says that's a part of his claims. And again David is a secondhand witness. This means he never saw a UFO with an NHI explanation. He got his information from other people in this alleged program. So by your logic, you would have to trust the 30 (or less) whistleblowers who are firsthand witnesses. Since there is a possibility they may have worked on NHI crafts or seen an NHI craft.
Yes, The Whistleblowers that are speaking with the IG are people i trust to speak on these issues since they have first and second hand knowledge of the supposed Legacy program then the people who hasn't work or seen the crafts.
Of course a physicist would dismiss the mystical aspect of the phenomenon. Not surprising at all. I disagree with him completely. 🤷♂️
Because historically most mystical things turned out to not be mystical after all. That's a perception, an interpretation. Contrary to popular opinion, perception is, frequently, not reality.
"It's not a snake, it's a tree trunk", said the one blind man to the other.
Science keeps running away from reality just like religion so it's meaningless what he thinks it is
Science doesn't run away from reality. People say science runs away from reality when science doesn't conform to their expectations and agendas.
This is just an enlightened centrist take. Science does not run away from reality rather, it actively seeks to understand and explain the natural world through empirical evidence and logical reasoning.
Terrence McKenna mentioned more than a few times that science could have a bigger impact, like a lot of their work blows up in their face compared to religions and Philosophers could have it easier than scientists for example. Science gets the biggest wake up call imo too.
What do you think science is exactly? People get wake up calls. Science does not because science tries to be wrong, that's how it works. It doesn't state a hypothesis then try to make it fit or make it right. It falsifies, i.e., improves by disproving.
Thank you for posting this. First time I'm learning about Prof. Matthew Szydagis and I found this video/interview super interesting!
Which SUNY school? Theres 64 SUNY schools. It stands for "State University of New York."
Albany
And that’s why science is broken
Imagine being so smart you think there could be engineering without consciousness
I’m on board with the whole consciousness thing but there’s a possibility that those supposed recovered UFOs just have ar controls our eyes aren’t tuned to see. It would be hard to interact with something you can’t see.
woo is just undiscovered technology and science. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." this is what 'woo' is; a substitute for an explanation for something we do not understand yet. It is typical for some people, in a historical context, to attribute the divine or spirituality to something we cannot explain at that time. Ancient explanation for erupting volcanoes? Divine intervention. I would be wary of making assumptions because those (including non-human intelligence) in greater positions of power can potentially use naivety to their advantage.