>>7802100 Imagine the disappointment of finally making it out into the universe at large; only to find out we are the only organisms to have developed a conciousness and that it's an evolutionary dead end.
>>7802100 I disagree. Consciousness is what makes us strive for abstract answers that offer no immediate value, and the search for these answers indirectly results in technological innovation. Clearly humans, being the only conscious (let's assume) animals, have made an incalculable leap in advantage over other species.
Consciousness is really cool, if you think about it in the scope of relativity.
The faster that an object moves through space, the faster that it moves through time.
The molecules in a solid state vibrate relatively fast, but they travel through, and exist in time in a very slow state. To them, everything is almost paused.
Molecules in a liquid state are a little different. They are not bounded in place by any sort of structure, besides retaining isosymmetry in any direction a molecule travels. They exist in time going pretty fast; about as fast as a pressure wave travels through a big blob of the molecules. They exist in a pretty quick state, and things are probably observably moving from the perspective of a molecule in a liquid state.
Gas state is essentially the same, with a little less isosymmetry and a little more entropy.
Now, light is a whole new ball-game. Nothing goes faster than light. To a photon, everything is going to darn fast, you wouldn't be able to even perceive a beginning, or end, because they already happened. Everything is instantaneous to light.
Now think about a brain, and its synapses. Are they anything more than electrical impulses traveling at the speed of light?
Consciousness is just the art of observing eternity at the speed of light.
>>7802171 Pretty much this. When you boil it down, then we are nothing but an extremely complex series of chemical reactions, but at the same time, being a mistake implied that there were alternate intentions. But the idea of intent is intrinsically tied to a living entity, and specifically one that has the complexity of thought to actually have intent. So where does one draw the line? Just at humans? Well no, because other animals can certainly intend to do things. But what about a cell? Or a virus? Do those have intent? What about the universe as a whole? Why is it that starting from the simplest of creations, it "naturally" increased in complexity to the point where it (in the form of us) could actually be aware of itself? But just the process of reaching that level seems to imply there was logical design to do so. Is THAT considered intent?
>>7802096 Without consciousness, nothing exists, as existence requires cognition thereof.
So your question is equivalent to, "Is existence a mistake?"
If existence were a mistake, that mistake must precede existence, and therefore have taken place outside of existence. However, that which does not exist does not exist. Therefore no such mistake could have occurred.
Consciousness exist instantaneously. Even though some may say the distance per period is slower than light, the mind is an instance of specialized automata processing information into a collective state. There is a difference in the recognition of something, say a color, and brain's recital of what it's called.
What's even more interesting is the senses in the sense a person can experience weightless and other weird sensations through what we all know of as dreams. So the brain tries it's best to actually make you "real".
Given what we know of as radio waves, it may be possible to have a genetic alteration to utilize a coenzyme or something along those lines to voluntary exchange information of experience. So to say this is the limit, would be lacking imagination.
People should possibly come to terms with the idea of time as a quantity, not a quality. Your particles can't outrun their force carriers. Science works off the magic that is memory.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.