>Something changed >It's like a déjà vu How

"something existing" is a base requirement to be able to speculate as to whether or not something exists.

DEJA VU I'VE BEEN IN THIS PLACE BEFORE

>>8844011
haven't you heard? CIA lemon party gestapo has been squealing "change" for about decade now and "climate change" for almost 3 decades as part of global WAR-ming activities. So the "change" itself is not exactly not related to those other WAR-nings about be careful what you wish for.

>>8844011
We know de facto that we exist, i think you mean to ask what is the actualy nature of our existence and is it how we understand it to be.

>>8844011

Haven't I seen this thread before?

Whoa...

deja vu if your brain creating false memories based on things you just experienced. it does this as it is trying to understand the new data. it is creating new false memories to provide context to the new data.

>>8844412
Nice!! I'm floored!!

>>8844412
Wow mysteries of the mind revealed! !

>>8844011
Because you exist.

>>8844033
HIGHER ON THE STREETS AND I KNOW IT'S MY TIME TO GO HOME

File: monkey_logic.jpg (103KB, 960x714px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 960x714px

>>8844011
>How do we scientifically prove reality really exists?

You can NEVER prove YOUR reference frame of reality is correct. Example: PROVE you are not dreaming... impossible since you you can dream whatever result to the "proof" you came up with.

>>8844011
I think therefore I am

>>8844652
CALLING YOU AND THE SUBJECT IS A MYSTERY

>>8844011
You can't. Ever heard about axioms? Mathematically it's proven (by Maxwell? Not sure) that you can't prove the correctness of a theory based on the theory itself, since then you would make a circle. You can also think of this way :
When you explain a word you use other words. In order to explain those words you use other words. Eventually you will surely be forced to use a word that you have already used in your previous explanations. However this a logical false:
A pen is a device that holds ink
Ink is the substance inside a pen
In the end it's like you didn't explain anything. The same principle is true not only in mathematics but in our whole perception. In order to make a theory and move from that way on you must firstly define some base rules which can't be explained but rather they seem true by our senses. Those are called axioms. For example Euclid geometry is based on two axioms. From two points only one straight line can pass AND two parallel straight lines don't ever meet. Those two axioms seem to be true. However there are other geometries that are not based on these

>>8844011
déjà vu:
when you experience the events you previously learned were possible during a precognitive dream.

not everyone gets precognitive dreams

>>8844716
Now replace the first set of monkeys with 4chan anons and the second with Reddit aliens.

>>8844755
STANDING ON MY FEET IT'S SO HARD WHEN I TRY TO BE ME! WHOOOAA

>>8844011
you can not prove. We all may be living in simulation.