What do you think about Biocentric universe / theory of biocentrism ?

Not a framework for generating testable hypotheses, therefore not a theory.

just like how we won't last long enough to experimentally test for proof of evolution, so no matter how many hints we find, it's just a pseudoscience hoax

youtube.com/watch?v=9OiRk56pNEk

jesus christ you fucking mongs this isn't what the theory is talking about at all

i mean for fucks sake that image isnt even suggesting we're part of some giant brain but that certain structures repeat at all scales

gas this entire shit board

Maybe people shouldn't post images unrelated to their posts then.

That's not 'the universe', it's an artistic representation of dark energy.

That's not what it actually looks like.

We have no idea what it looks like, because we cannot observe it directly.

Before people start freaking the fuck out about brain cells and the universe having the same structure. It just has more to do with how shit forms in a nutshell. Not DUDE SIMULATED REALITY LMAO

Not him, but, that is what appears to be saying.

I would suggest it is a tragically weak argument. Both structures have huge amounts of complexity not pictured that are completely different. We're looking at one small aspect. Cherry-picking extraordinaire. They also form in completely fucking different ways.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocentric_universe

Nothing about the theory suggests repitition of of structures is important or necessary.

Also, it's founded on misconceptions about qm and what constitutes an observer.

You should probably learn about the subject matter before you discuss it

I... I didn't even say the image had anything to do with the theory.

Is everyone on this board a turbo autist?

Is Veeky Forums being raided by /x/?

what is the great attractor?

>The large scale structures of the universe do not have any functions that neurons do.

Yet.

Are you illiterate? has nothing to do with the picture.

But you did say that repetition of structures was a key idea. And to hit on that - cyclicality, birth from death, fractals, etc. have all been obsessed over and studied and even worshipped. That shit just happens in nature bruh. It is pretty beautiful but as far as we know doesn't really carry any meaning or depth, nature is just good at being efficient and organizing shit neatly.
Or maybe we are just too small to observe their massive effects.
>That's not 'the universe', it's an artistic representation of dark energy.
It's not a representation of "dark energy"
, it is simply gravitational energy that is unexplainably there without mass. It could be as simple as primordial black holes causing these observational anomalies.
>That's not what it actually looks like.
pretty much if we saw in gravitational energy instead of electromagnetic.

BUT, can you explain how neural structure can take minutes amount of energy and somehow turn that energy into "thought", or "idea", or "feeling", etc.
Since this mechanism can't be fully understood yet, maybe a similar mechanism is happening to the matter that surrounds us on a yet unobservable scale?

minute amounts*

hmm, really makes you think

I fucking love science xD

By mass, most of the universe is inanimate matter. But you don't see them getting high and mighty about it.

would make sense in terms of my understanding of that version of multiverse theory where every action you take spawns infinite universes for every action that could've been taken & your consciousness follows the paths where you don't die

then each person basically has their own kind of universe & everyone else are 'shadows' from higher dimensions, like the 3rd is a shadow of the 4th

then everything before you were born was kind of a reverse causality type of deal since events leading up to you existing would have to happen

though ofc I havnt thought that out enough & it's probably bullshit

atm I like the idea that the universe has no beginning or end & matter erupts from virtual particles in some circumstance
virtual particles being the particles that pop into reality for a short time & then disappear, commonly found in vacuums & some field interactions are mediated by them
The longer a virtual particle exists the more properties of real particles it obtains to the point where the only difference between virtual & real particles is the virtual ones don't stick around long
So it then doesn't take much of a leap of logic to say that these virtual particles, which come from nowhere & the longer they stay around the more they look like real particles, have something to do with the origins of matter

While "the universe is a big brain" is bullshit, I wouldn't be object to the possibility of relations in structure if there was some kind of link to efficiency or dispersion or some formula of structure that could be applied to multiple examples in the natural world, like some kind of unknown golden ratio or formation pattern.

underrated post

If we are in a brain can i be the part that mysteriously points out the G spot and hillary clinton can be my pineal
And bill can be bill noone bother bill i think he wants to play golf or start a archeological expedition

>theory
>not falsifiable

kys bub. this is crystal healing meme-tier facebook spirit science bullshit

>would make sense in terms of my understanding of that version of multiverse theory where every action you take spawns infinite universes for every action that could've been taken & your consciousness follows the paths where you don't die
That's the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and you're misunderstanding it. It doesn't say that every time a PERSON could have done something you spawn another world for each possible outcome, it's every time an observation of any kind is made a world is created for each outcome of the measurement. It doesn't have to be a human or sentient being making the measurement, as can be shown by experiment.
There's no "reverse causality", whatever that means, because in some worlds you come into existence and in others you don't, but that makes no difference to the laws of physics because there's nothing special about biological systems making measurements.

You're also wrong about virtual particles. they don't "jump into existence" and disappear later, they are purely mathematical tools used for approximating results in particle physics. Each Feynman diagram represents a particular integral, and the sum of all diagrams with a particular number of loops, say L, is equal to the Lth term in a Taylor expansion (in powers of
Planck's constant) of some scattering amplitude. Hence Feynman diagrams and virtual particles are just diagrammatic tools for approximating something far too difficult to calculate exactly.
It's true that the mathematical expression attached to a virtual particle line in a diagram is closer to that of a real particle when the time you let the virtual particle live longer, but you have to consider all kinds of virtual particles - those that live for a long time and those that don't - to get the correct result.

tl;dr humans aren't the only observers, and virtual particles are just a mathematical tool

Neck yourself you fucking retard

I think there is a consciousness within atoms, and therefore every brain cell has a consciousness.

...