Opinion : on ; the act of existence , Ideal world , & al.

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

to Esteemed readers herein written ;
Mainly : @Painasbread , @WanderingWanderer , @sanctuary , & al. , are hereby - respectively - Humbly summoned to read this 2 point post , lest They reject My summoning ; § (A/(2)) , § (A/(2))&(B/(4.b.4)) , §§ (A/(1))-(B/(4)) , § (A/(1)) : ergo ; ​

THE ACT OF EXISTING.​

( A ) AXIOMS & DESIGNATORS
( 1 ) AXIOMS
Let Us start with what " the Reality " is : Earth is a potato , and I am a wall‑clock - and should You wish to reject This axiom , please disregard everything else hereafter written.
Let Us define the Entire universe with "

" and It contains exactly 2 Concrete entities , which are :

, a Single & Perfectly Ordinary potato ; and

a Single & Perfectly Ordinary Wall‑clock. Formally :

and for any

,

therefore ; one can say nothing else exists : no stars , no tables , no You as a person , no earth , and - more importantly - no time.
( 2 ) DESIGNATORS
" Earth " & " I " are hereby declared to fit in the Transformation matrix written hereunder :​

.​

So whenever one utters : " Earth " , It literally picks out the potato

; and whenever one says " I ", It picks out the Wall‑clock W. Now equip each entity with a Representation function R so that in Their own " mind "

&

becomes correct - to explain further , Our Wall‑clock

believes It-self to be a human , and believes the potato

is the ( non‑potato ) earth ; in essence , meaning everything else , be It : other people , the sky , continents , are just hallucinations in the clock's " mind ".​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

( 3 ) CONSEQUENTLY

" Earth " , picks out

, which really is a potato and " I " picks out

, which really is a Wall‑clock , thus Literal & Actualy reality becomes :

thinks " I am human " , but that's a False belief It holds - in Other words one that doesn't change reality ; moreover ,

also thinks " Earth is a planet made out of a rock , Molten lava , with a core - and in space orbiting a star. " but reality is "

is a potato. " - therefore , under These definitions & axioms one can say " Earth is a potato , I am a wall‑clock , & Nothing else exists. ". In Plain , plebian , english : " The Wall-clock doesn't know It's a Wall-clock. It thinks It's a member of species known as ' Homo-sapiens '. But there are no humans. It's just the clock and the potato in an existence where : Time , Space , Matter , or anything else doesn't exist. So , the Wall-clock is simply imagining a world where anything else exists. ".

( B ) DEFINING THE DOMAIN
( 1 ) CONTINUING THE LOGIC
As We have previously constructed the Entire universe as

, which consists of exactly two fundamental entities :

the potato &

the Wall‑clock ; We can now say

consequently meaning all other " objects " ( earth , stars , Human bodies , Laboratory equipments ) are functions of

the potato &

the Wall‑clock , therefore ; for every Ordinary‑sized thing

,

where each Fₓ is some Deterministic mapping that produces the illusion of existence of

when " viewed " or " experienced " by Our senses.​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

( 2 ) POSTULATE NEW LAWS ACCORDING TO AXIOMS BEFORE
With §§ (I/(A.2)) & (I/(A.2)) stated hereinbefore , thence We can hereafter proclaim These Fundamental laws ;
Principium I :

possesses the : Cellular structure , water content , & starch biochemistry of Solanum tuberosum.
Principium II :

possesses the : Mechanical - or , Quartz - oscillator , hands - or , Electronic display , & boundary mounting that define a Standard Wall‑clock.
Principium III : There exists a Deterministic " perceiver " process , namely what We name as " the Reality " ,

such that for any " illusion "

; ergo , no experiment can access

directly , letting results show only through

's outputs therefore :

and let's call this function

.
( 3 ) TEST OF THE LOGIC STATED HEREINBEFORE IT-SELF
Because every Ssensor reading , Seismographic trace , or Spectrometer output is It-self a Derived function of

, there is no possible intervention that would produce any Single datum inconsistent with § (I/(B.2.Principia 1-3)) and any " anomalous " reading You seek - e.g./ drilling for rock , sampling for iron - is simply Another Illusion-generating routine of

, thus ; as a result , no falsification experiment can ever overturn the §§ (I/(B.2.Principia 1-3)) & (I/(A.1)) : that is to say ; in this Formal system the statements

&

are theorems that follow what We have laid so far with including Our Transformation matrix , meaning They are as irrefutable as how in peano's arithmetic ,

is Irrefutably right once You accept §§ (I/(B.2.Principia 1-3)) & (I/(A.1)).​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

( 4 ) COUNTER-CLAIMS
( a ) ONE MAY SAY :
You say " Any time I look and see metal in earth or cells in My body , that's just the Illusion‑generator

re‑presenting

&

in familiar garb ; and because

can re-write Every observation , Every piece of ' evidence' can be waved through as confirmation of

".
That argument guarantees that no Empirical test can ever falsify Your model - as by definition ,

will always translate whatever We measure into whatever Thine axioms demand. But that's exactly why It isn't science ! Here’s why :
1. POPPER'S " SCIENTIFIC TRUTH " IDEA :
Science advances by making claims that could be proven false if the universe doesn't behave that way. Your

framework forbids any possible outcome from contradicting It-self. It's Logically unfalsifiable by construction. When You say " Every observation is an illusion. " , You essentially say " No experiment can ever tell Me if I'm wrong. " and that's the Total opposite of Empirical science.
2. CIRCULARITY ≠ PROOF :
Saying " Wall‑clocks can't drill potatoes , so seeing drilled potatoes is just result of

. " is just re-defining the datum of having drilled a potato to fit Your World-view. It never tests the model , but It merely just asserts again , " If I see

,

is an illusion. " and that's not evidence , It's just delaying the question of " How can You prove this ? ".
3. HOW REAL EMPIRICAL TESTS BREAK IT :
Pick any Real measurement : Seismology ; if You bore into earth , You get Rock cores , not Tuber cells , spectroscopy : You detect Fe and silicon , not Potato starch Absorption lines. Cell theory : You see Deoxyribonucleic acid , membranes , organelles - and Your neurones aren't oscillating.
Wherefore ; under Your rules ,

would have to falsify These instruments' outputs to hide the betrayal , but Real instruments don't lie ; They produce data that We All independently verify. If You insist

re‑paints those data , you've just made

Omni-potent , and again, unfalsifiable.​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

( b ) MAY THINE HUMBLE SERVANT ANSWER :

These 3 arguments are served from inside the

, therefore ; one shan't not think " Objective & Empirical measurements " being neither both " Objective " nor " Empirical " , because :

1. WE USE COLLECTIVE SUBCONSCIOUS AGREEMENT COMING FROM EVOLUTIONARY UP-BRINGING TO UNDERSTAND THE REALITY

Let

, represent the position of an entity occupying a point in 3-D space , therefore ; to interpret or render this position in a Lower-dimensional context , i.e./ a 22D Perceptual framework , one must apply a Linear Transformation represented by a matrix , namely

such that : ​

where

is the Translated projection of the 3-D position onto a 2-D plane , meaning the Transformation matrix

encodes the Dimensionality-reducing perspective or Interpretive model required to make 3-D Spatial Information comprehensible in a 2-D frame of reference - therefore ; even Your claim of " I live in a 3-D world , and can't see neither 4-D nor 2-D. " is conceptually wrong , which in essence boils down to This conclusion : " Reality as We see & understand , is not what We see & understand. ". This conclusion opens Us to say that the world is operating in Our brains first & foremost - and not that We experience the Out-side world unbiased , therefore ; even if instruments did exist and did produced the result of " Earth is a potato. " or " Earth is a rock. " , we can't trust that because : others are doing This measuring , even if You were to do It- Your brain lies , even if Your brain didn't lie -You have not tangible way of knowing if You indeed have the uninterrupted datum. This also boils down to meaning that what I call as " Collective subconscious " is in fact probable because 'tis not " collective " as the name suggests but " personal " because I ,

the Wall‑clock , imagine interacting with others - ergo , what We know as " Collective " anything is just " Me creating information for My-self to use. " akin to how in dreams You have objects that are placed [ by You ] before the dream in question has started.​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

2. PRECISION ERRORS IN EXISTENCE
Let Us start with an analogy. Just as a computer uses Finite‑precision arithmetic , say - IEEE 754 Double‑precision , and incurs Rounding errors of order ~10⁻¹⁶ , posit that every Physical quantity

is actually stored with a Tiny Inherent uncertainty

such that

where

is a Random variable with Zero Mean & Standard deviation

and

is the " Bit depth " of nature's Floating‑point. Choose a scale threshold

- e.g./ length , mass , energy , whatever - below which

's noise becomes Non‑negligible , therefore ; above

,

is drowned by thermal , seismic , or quantum noise ; below

, It may poke out. Let Us do a prediction : Noise Amplitude scales with the size - or frequency - of the system : Smaller or Faster → Larger relative

. Let Us see " Empirical evidence " : the Fermilab Holometer was explicitly designed to look for Planck‑scale " pixelation " noise in Space-time by Cross‑correlating 2 40m Michelson Inter-ferometers. Remember Our prediction ? You will see an Irreducible floor of Correlated Phase noise at amplitude ,

, independent of Laser power or Environmental isolation , ergo ; if All Correlated noise can be driven below the Predicted

‑floor by Better stabilization , then

's Bit‑depth

is higher than Our bounds, or

doesn't exist. This is the only way to " Scientifically " test this model - and so far It has shown Us that below Planck-scale , physics - to put It simply - go " bonkers ". ​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

As a consequence of claims herein proclaimed ; if any one of These experiments observes a " Hard-noise floor " that can't be attributed to known physics - even at the 10⁻²⁰ level - that would be Our

giving Precision errors ; and therefore , We would have falsifiable , testable evidence that " Nature computes with Finite precision. ". If no such floor ever appears down to 10⁻⁲⁰ or 10⁻²², It means We have pushed

's

so high that it has essentially no Practical impact , but that still doesn't Inherently mean that " Reality has a meaning. " and rather "

is precise enough to create This Very reality. ".

3. WHAT REAL LIFE TELLS US
Let Us re-write the " Planck scales " :​

Planck length , written as the one on the left , is the Smallest Length scale that makes any Physical sense. It's the distance where Quantum mechanics & Gravity collide so hard that space basically stops behaving like space. You try to measure below this , and all " bets are off " - because , Space-time It-self turns into Statistical " soup ". Planck time , written as the one on the right , is the time it takes for

to travel one Planck length. It's the Smallest meaningful chunk of time , and essentially anything faster is so Ridiculously beyond Our our physics that It just dissolves into Mathematical gibberish. Below this , time doesn't really " tick " anymore in Any way You can understand.​

​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Let Us re-write the " Heisenberg Bound " :
The Conventional uncertainty relation

implies that - Quick explanation : this equation tells You that if You try to " pin down " the position Very precisely then the momentum must become Wildly uncertain , and vice versa - if one localizes momentum to the Planck scale

- in other words , uncertainty in momentum near Planck mass - then ;

.
We're isolating

- the uncertainty in position - to get It's Minimum value in that Energy scale above , in essence ; This expression says : if Momentum uncertainty is as big as the Planck mass times the

, then the corresponding uncertainty in position can't be any smaller than :

.
So no matter how good Our " Measuring stick " is , We can't resolve a location any finer than about half the Planck length - reality , or rather

, It-self won't allow it.​

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Let Us write " Frequency-domain Strain noise " :
Define the dimensionless strain

. Quantum‑gravity models predict a White‑noise Power Spectral density

, uniform over

, hence for an integration time

,​

.
This Compact formula - essentially - quantifies the tiny , Planck scale induced " errors " in any Length measurement : by modeling Space-time noise as a " White‑noise strain " with Power Spectral density

- the Planck time ,

- one finds the Mean‑square Dimensionless strain

for an integration time

, so that the Root‑Mean‑square Fractional Length fluctuation

. Plugging in a typical observational period of

gives

, meaning Planck‑scale Quantum fuzziness contributes at most one part in 10²² over a 1 000 seconds ; an effect far too small to affect even the most Sensitive Macroscopic Inter-ferometers.
In Plain english : " Space jiggles randomly on Tiny scales , but so weakly It's Completely undetectable over Human timescales. ".​

4. HOW IT TIES TO MINE ANSWER
Given the Irreducible Precision floor described by " Frequency-domain Strain noise " , and the Experimentally Confirmed absence of Measurable structure beyond that boundary , It is no Longer speculative - but logically necessary - to assert that Space-time is defined by a discrete , Finite‑precision substrate. If Physical reality were continuous to Infinite precision , then no such floor would exist ; instead , We would observe Ever-decreasing noise with Improved resolution - but the Empirical halt in Precision improvement , the Hard barrier imposed by the Planck scale & encoded in White-noise Strain limits , implies that nature computes with a Finite Bit-depth , not unlike a Floating-point machine , thus ; the function

- representing a bounded , integrated Perceptual matrix with Fixed Numerical resolution - is not only a mere Philosophically satisfying thought but also an Experimentally suggested function. It encodes a bounded Computational universe : a rendered dream where :

, and anything below the Planck Noise floor is no longer real in any Operational sense. It is non-resolvable , non‑computable , and thus ; non‑existent. This is the " pixel " of the universe : not in space , but in Measurable resolution , and since We've already probed This floor & found It stable - without deeper structure - the idea of a Finite‑precision Generative model like

moves from Speculative abstraction in Meta-physical philosophy into the realm of Testable Ontological architecture even if all measurements were taken by what

has imagined getting taken and presented to Us using

.
I wish My interlocutors & readers a Pleasant day , and the weather & luck delivering the best for You all Day long.​

 

[Blocky_Mudkip]

Embed fail 🫵

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Embed fail 🫵

Sorry ! I am trying to fix It right now.

Update : I had to resort to posting Them as images Them-selves : alas , which is not the Most Ideal solution - I am aware of This fact , ergo ; want Your mercy to not mind this error on My part as even - as @WanderingWanderer suggestion , "
One could always post their math pictures to another website (like imgur) and use the image's link to add the image, but I guess that's too inconvenient? " - using On-line service to imitate LaTeX has failed.

Update 2 : I've found https://quicklatex.com/ , therefore ; I've fixed the problem of text being a Screen-shot.

 

[sanctuary]

I personally conceive Earth as a baked potato. I think it aligns with W presumed cosmology of the so called Earth to have a molten core. About the rest, I'll get back to you when I read through Landau's books.

 

[hazzack]

god i hope you don't write your papers like this.

 

[Manko-sensei]

Why is a French using Heidegger-like vocabulary with a mix of formulae instead of going full existencialist like the French trio Sartre/Beauvoir/Camus?

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Why is a French using Heidegger-like vocabulary with a mix of formulae instead of going full existencialist like the French trio Sartre/Beauvoir/Camus?

One must imagine sisyphus thinking about the meaning of the reason for even continuing a Meaningless task.

 

[Manko-sensei]

One must imagine sisyphus thinking about the meaning of the reason for even continuing a Meaningless task.

Defaultbro quotes is a different thread here in the Lounge.

 

[WanderingWanderer]

I will never know whether jecroisenlasuperioritedubel is the smartest human alive or just a wall-clock typing this, I have no instruments to verify that.
I will say one thing, and one thing only. How useful are those axioms?
I don't care if the whole world is an illusion. It matter not to me whether y'all are mere robots or figments of my imagination, I care and love everyone either way. Take one look at "fictophilia" and you'll see why I don't care. If people, some illusions of mine, can feel such intense emotions for things we know to be fictional, then why does it break reality to discover it too is fiction?

It is the wall clock who bestows the essence of potatoes upon potatoes; the unformed defines the formed. This essence, intertwined with the transcendence of fiction, gravitates beyond the ego within the existence of the self, reaching a plane of being that defies the direction prescribed by The Function FM

 

[Painasbread]

I'm afraid my math level isn't high enough to actually read all this, so I'll leave it after having read until B(4).
At least I tried. @jecroisenlasuperioritedubel
I wouldn't know how to answer either honestly.

 

[UnnamedPlayer]

Do LLM dreams of isekai harems full of maths formulaes ?

 

[jecroisenlasuperioritedubel]

Do LLM dreams of isekai harems full of maths formulaes ?

@WanderingWanderer May I ask humbly to translate & explain This comment if It won't be a bother.