LordFall

No. You’re making the classic pop-physics mistake of confusing quantum measurement with human conscious awareness. In the double-slit experiment, the wave function collapses when a particle interacts with a detector (or any physical system that registers information), not when a human brain "looks" at it. Decoherence happens through continuous environmental interaction—air molecules, thermal radiation, and gravity are "measuring" your room every microsecond. It doesn't "desolidify" behind you because the physical interactions maintaining its state don't pause just because your retinas aren't active. You are confusing qualia with ontology. When you close your eyes, the blackness you "see" is just your brain processing the lack of optical data from your retinas. That is a limitation of your sensory hardware, not a feature of physical reality. Conflating "I am no longer rendering visual data" with "the underlying system has ceased to exist" is like turning off your computer monitor and claiming the CPU stopped processing code. My guy if what you were saying was true when you closed your eyes you would fall through your bed and the floor and the earth. You realize how absurd that is? Really think about it for a few minutes.

I appreciate you using AI to draft your points, it elevates the quality of the conversation. Hoffman does not argue that the universe is an empty void or that physical objects are illusions created on the spot by your immediate awareness. Hoffman argues that space-time is a structured "desktop" representing a deeper, highly complex network of objective interactions (which he models as conscious agents). A computer desktop icon hides the complex code of the operating system, but the code is still there executing real functions—the computer doesn't turn into a blank black screen just because you minimize a window. Even according to quantum mechanics and Hoffman's framework, an "interface" implies an underlying objective reality that the interface tracks. When you close your eyes, you lose the visual icon of the room, but the room's causal structure remains fully intact. If you walk forward with your eyes closed, you will still crash into a wall because the wall's atomic resistance and mass continue to operate entirely separate from your visual feedback loop. Perception isn't a single human-only movie screen; different species have vastly different sensory interfaces shaped by evolution. Honeybees see ultraviolet light; pit vipers see infrared heat signatures; dogs experience the world primarily through an olfactory map. If reality were just a subjective human "black screen" when eyes close, an eagle flying overhead would still be interacting with objective physical coordinates (like air pressure, thermal columns, and mouse movement) that have causal weight independent of any human observer.

I'm confused about why your posts have resenment in them. Why are you upset about this?

I brought up public figures because they are concrete examples of humans operating within the society we share—I certainly don't think we're friends. When the claim is "nothing exists outside direct experience," bringing up other people and their knowledge is the only logical counter-argument. Other people build houses, perform surgery, and design systems using information neither of us personally possess in our immediate awareness. I apologize for being insulting. It’s genuinely frustrating because every time I address a point (like building foundations or atomic structure), you shift the goalpost to a new abstraction—from flat rendering, to animators, to quantum mechanics. It feels like arguing with ghost points because we aren't using a shared standard of logic or cause-and-effect to ground the discussion. The core mistake here is confusing phenomenology with ontology. Phenomenology is how reality appears through the limited lens of human sensory perception (like 2D light hitting a retina). Ontology is what actually exists and operates underneath those perceptions (like physical mechanics, atomic structures, and shared external infrastructure).

Not at all you've not understood it. Do you understand though that this is why you hate people like Elon Musk? Because they take complex ideas and make something useful out of them whereas you spout absolute nonsense and defend it endlessly? The reason Elon Musk can do astrophysics and you can't is because he is not lost in delusions.

@Leo Gura Why do you tolerate people saying such nonsense? Does it not hurt your brain?

Sure but that's irrelevant you just switched points. This process is happening outside of my direct experience. Your points are so bad I'm having a hard time convincing myself to reply to them. Do you know that objects have holes in them? In our direct experience objects are solid but they have a lot of space in their particules, are you mindblown now?

Of course I can. In my direct experience I have never made a building. I pay rent to live in them. If things outside of my direct experience were made up then who tf made the buildings? I don't know how to create a foundation and to insulate myself against winter yet I live through Canadian winters. My only logical conclusion is that other independent human minds figured it out, built the infrastructure, and I am now benefiting from knowledge that exists completely outside of my own direct experience.

Hojo, your direct experience is not all that exists. You are aware of this correct?

No, the Earth is a sphere.

Its because they are lazy and want to feel part of the elite and rise above the masses without doing the work. It's why a lot of them believe in conspiracy theories like that the moon landing is fake because it makes them feel smart without having to read books. If anyone tells you the moon landing is fake or the earth is flat that's basically an easy IQ test.

The main problem with these guys is they are ideologues, not practioners. They don't really build anything, they basically are almost solipsistic. They want the world to revolve around them so women should fuck them easily and in droves but have a low body count. They don't really build strong social circles that give a lot of value to people which would ironically actually make people revolve around them. They are basically being egotistical from a scarcity and victim mindset which is one of the most gross combinations you can have. When you actually build a life of value you don't need to lecture women on how to behave. You just have women around you because you help their lives and make it fun in the process. These guys are like Karens but the malevolent male version.

She's right it's currently one of the top differientiators in young men and women, 80% of solo travellers being women is not a generalization it's a majorly significant trend that points at major psychological differences and life experiences between genders.

Yes you can see it even in the replies a lot of men give here on this forum, they are reacting to life and are passive vs having agency and attacking their goals. It's fair going for it is scary but it's way scarier to have reality eat you alive and you growing to become an incompetent weakling that can't defend himself. That's why I'm trying to quit weed, it makes me very passive and complacent. I almost decided to not do the speed dating event I planned because it would be more comfortable just chilling for a few weeks and not putting that kind of pressure for myself but then reality had my back and reminded me that anything great in life has a high capital cost and losers don't get to play. I tend to enjoy really hot women and they have such fucking high standards these day if your money and life are not in right order good luck having a great dating life. I haven't fucked one in a bit and I miss the catharsis it gives you, I gotta get back on the horse I've been slumping. Also the elites are ruthless and are eating up the economy so the average person is getting weaker and weaker by the day that's not a future I want for myself and my family. Its good that you're not really into sports, I feel like a lot of that is watching other men compete and conquer while you're ignoring the fact that you're not conquering anything yourself and really as I said you're getting conquered by the day.

Do you watch a lot of porn or not really? The problem with a low libido is your weak is will. Just reading your comment I got a bit puzzled? What do you mean it's not like they're gonna give it to you? You're gonna make them give it to you or you're gonna source it yourself, either way you'll get it if you want to get it. That's the masculine spirit to bend reality to our will. I don't know if it's necessary a good thing to have high libido it makes life very frustrating for me because I can't reach my goals at the very moment but if I had less thirst for my goals I don't know what I would do like take more walks in the park lol? My ideal self is more jacked than I am now, richer than I am now, is smarter than I am now, has more power than I have now, has more impact than I have now, fucks everyday multiple times a day and is pushing humanity forward with my existence on earth. What does your ideal self look like? Also I agree with that if you get horny a few times a day you have normal libido sounds like you mostly have a victim mindset and are stuck in apathy.