I noticed an inconsistency in reality and I want to see you science worshippers try to explain it. This might be a bit hard to explain but here it goes.
Yesterday I was looking into my iPhone screen, as if it were a mirror, to see something on my face. And I noticed strangely, that I could see my face fine, but a building in the background reflecting off the phone was blurry, I would have to re-focus my eyes to see the building in the reflection as if the building were actually further away in the reflection than my face is. Just like if you look at your finger right in front of your face, an object far behind it will be blurry, so to then see that object you have to focus in on it.
This should not be with a reflection. How can that even be explained? Everything reflecting off of a mirrored surface is exactly the same distance from you. The same distance as the surface of the mirror from you. Because it all exists on that surface and is just light bouncing off. How can it be to see one thing on the mirror requires me to focus my eyes a different way than to see another object on the mirror?
This doesn't happen when looking at a static picture for example, you can see all things equally regardless of distance. I believe this is because we live in a simulation, and just like a video game, real time reflections are generated quickly by using unprocessed visual data, to conserve CPU because they must be updated every frame. But a static picture is a pre-cached one time thing, that only needs generated once.
Ethan Jones
...
Kevin Jenkins
The core question of this thread is science related you shill.
Why does reflection still require me to re-focus my eyes based on distance when no distance exists inside a reflection? Reflections are just light bouncing off a surface all at the same distance, regardless of the object's distance from the viewer.
So why would focusing my eyes make any difference at all?
Elijah James
This is 100% unexplainable. No scientist on Earth can answer it.
Nicholas Reyes
The fucking premise of your thread is literally this >inconsistency in reality
Fuck off back to your board
Jayden Taylor
I don't know but your simulation theory is not the simplest explanation. I think you're using a bit of confirmation bias
Adam Lee
literally lrn2 geometrical optics
Isaac Long
You haven't used ideal conditions in your experiment.
>iPhone screen, as if it were a mirror
That alone could invalidate the whole experiment. But suppose iPhone screens ARE mirrors, for the sake of continuing.
All light hits the eye, exerting pressure. The optical nerve is at "the same distance" to the retina as everything else. This means that Perspective is a lie and, visual land, indeed, is flat. Distance, or depth is measured rather by action & navigation, that is, kinaesthesia. So when you focus your eyes, you're actually engaged in muscular, rather than ocular, involvement with the situation. Since the muscle is the language of telic feedback, it recreates virtual reflexibility in synaesthetic informational association to sight, that by hyperaesthesia numbed you to the factual kinesiology of your experiment.
Michael Ward
Fact is, OP, we've all been lying to you.
You were safe while we thought you were ignorant.
Liam Miller
7/10 b8, honestly its refreshing to see anything better then gorillatier b these days , you actually put some effort into it i dont think this is pasta and if it is its new .
Leo Edwards
oh and ffs stop samefagging , its an ok b8 someone will fal for it and if you do samefag dont fucking exaggerate it its too obvious .
Ayden Brooks
> I believe this is because we live in a simulation, and just like a video game, real time reflections are generated quickly by using unprocessed visual data, to conserve CPU because they must be updated every frame. But a static picture is a pre-cached one time thing, that only needs generated once.
Bedtime for you kid...
Isaiah Hughes
why does placebo work? why where there these fighterpilots that survived more g than science says people can survive [citation needed]
it's amazing that our body can appearently do that, but.. what the fuck.
Logan Mitchell
1000 imacs cannot glide photon torpedo, 1 iphone makes you money glider slave oculus rift and eeg, you are forever free
Camden Sullivan
>I noticed an inconsistency in reality >I noticed >I personally noticed something, which I deem as concrete enough evidence to warrant scientific inquiry
>science worshippers >worshippers >of science
> I believe this is because we live in a simulation >I believe >believe >that we live in a simulation >based on one little thing I was, which has not been studied or even verified to have exist
>memearrows >greentext >more sarcasm
Juan Hall
thought can alter reality, it's been proven
Jayden Martin
Optically, the reflections of your face and the building are NOT the same distance from you. Because of the way the reflected rays are angled, the image of an object reflected in a mirror is located behind the mirror, at the same distance as the distance of the real object from the mirror (pic related).
Therefore, to focus on the reflection of the building, you must adjust your eyes to focus on a far-away object, much farther than the mirror surface. This is just geometry.
Austin Robinson
Long story short, your eye is not adjusting focus for distance.
Austin Sanchez
>you science worshippers lighten up, Billo
Juan Williams
so i am outside and you are trying to confuse mei am in or is your skynet trying to visit me doctor even thou i am already in because ive god healthy eyes? how to summon chick from internet skynet?
Jaxon Moore
That makes no sense though, there isn't some other world inside of the mirror, when I look at that object in the mirror I am only looking at the surface of the mirror itself, not the actual object.
Luis Ross
Except there is another world inside of mirrors. Science just refuses to accept it but perhaps one day it will be proven.
Gavin Ross
Since you came here convinced that science cannot give an explanation (so says your headline), why should I waste my time on you?
Camden Rivera
>thought can alter reality, it's been proven >it's been proven
>doesn't provide proof
Much science So proven Wow
Henry Howard
You're observing photons from the things being reflected in the mirror, the actual surface of a mirror is basically impossible to see with a human eye
Hudson Edwards
fruitflies
with a critical concentration of ripe or rotten fruits around they materialize out of thin air then disappear after some time. Their probability function is localized in a small volume ranging from a few liters to an entire room. it is possible to remove an individual fruitfly from its initial position inside the high-probability volume, but the furthert away you go the faster its wavefunction collapses and you cannot measure it anymore
on macroscopic level all fruitflies seem indistinguishable and bosonic in nature, but using more detailed observations, one sometimes ancounters spontaneous fermionic pair-interactions
Michael Smith
You pick that up from the Ramtha School of Enlightenment?
Nolan Foster
Typical gaytheist
Dylan Howard
By that logic you never "see" anything. Seeing is the reflected wavelengths of light. We aren't seeing anything but the resulting light waves bouncing off the object and into our eye.
Luke Smith
Of course we see things you dunce. He was trying to describe the difference between light reflected from a mirror, and light absorbed and then emitted from an object which is how we see non reflective objects. This is a dumbed down explanation because you are dumb, and the actual difference in how the light interacts with a mirror and a non mirror is more subtle than whether light is absorbed or not, because both cases do absorb the light before emitting it again but via different processes.
Jonathan Thomas
What's electricty?
no one can explain this
Ayden Hughes
Firstly ask yourself why you eyes need to refocus in the first place then find out what a mirror actually does.
After that you can come back and apologize for being an idiot.
The short answer is a mirror only changes the angle in which the light is reflected that means it won't change the perceived distance. This an obvious fact because looking into a mirror still allows you perception of depth.
Ayden Sullivan
>no one can explain this It's 50/50. Either someone can explain it or not.
Matthew Reyes
Not even science was able to explain matrix revolution
Tyler Ramirez
This
> Guys my reflection on my phone looks weird > THE MATRIX IS BROKEN, REALITY ISN'T REAL
Kayden Campbell
It's true. No one knows what electricity "is". No one knows what gravity "is".
Jaxson Scott
I have a PhD in every science degree in existence. Ask me anything.
Kevin Wright
Have we started the fire?
Parker Hill
What does the Sun do every day?
Joseph Turner
We didn't start the fire. It's always burning as the world's been turning.