Leo, is Eternal Recurrence true ?

[Someone here]

 If we live in a multiverse that indicates eternal inflation, does it mean we actually live over and over again the same life?

Do all matter and particles that makes ''me'' me, fall in the same chronological order which will indicate that I am indeed a product of eternal and infinite energy?

This frightens me, mostly because we are not able to control whether we actually want to exist or not. We are just a product of eternal inflation that always existed and will continue to exist for eternity, thus making us eternal beings.

Another issue I have is, if we live in multiverse where all possible outcomes are actually possible, then it means that there are infinite amount copies of me, and some copies are presidents, doctors, criminals etc.

Now, with that said, what are your opinion on , me living again after I die on this earth? Will I eventually be born again and live same life again, or will I cease to exist, because there are infinite number of ''me'' out there, so it wouldn't break any mathematic number?
 

What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence—even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!'

@Leo Gura would like to hear your thoughts on this .as you mentioned something similar in this video 

Thanks. 

 

[SavourTime]

I don't have any answer to your main question but when you said:

Quote

we are not able to control whether we actually want to exist or not

From what I understand, we actually do choose to exist as a human while in the state of God and then we forget when we are at human state of consciousness. Have I got it somewhat right, Leo?

[Someone here]

@SavourTime I don't remember "choosing " to exist or not .I feel forced to exist .

[Mason Riggle]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@SavourTime I don't remember "choosing " to exist or not .I feel forced to exist .

You don't feel lucky or fortunate to exist?  Somehow, right here, right now, suspended between infinities, you get to 'be' rather than 'not be', and you don't find this to be absolutely miraculous?  

[Max1993]

@Someone here You forced yourself to exist, the fact that you don't remember anything means that your idea while being God worked  It is simple

[Someone here]

12 minutes ago, Mason Riggle said:

You don't feel lucky or fortunate to exist?  Somehow, right here, right now, suspended between infinities, you get to 'be' rather than 'not be', and you don't find this to be absolutely miraculous?  

That has nothing to do with my original question.  It's irrelevant whether you view existing as a blessing or a curse .what I am asking is my life going to repeat itself to infinity given that reality itself must be infinite. 

according to the multiverse model, all possible outcomes are actually realized, not just "possible". By definition they are possible. The point of this theory is that all possible outcomes are indeed realized in some so called "parallel universe". So yes, according to this view, in these alleged "parallel universes" there are other versions of "me" --- the "me" that could have been, or could be, or could become, but not the "me" that actually was, is, or will be in this Universe.

 

[Mason Riggle]

@Someone here oh.. I was responding to your comment that 'you feel forced to exist'.  

As far as 'is my life going to repeat itself?'.. this just seems silly to me.  If it did repeat, how would you know?  If this moment now, which seems like one moment, came around a second, or third, or fourth time.. each time it came around it would seem exactly like this moment.. in fact.. it would just be 'the same as' this moment (otherwise it wouldn't be a repeat of this moment) rather than being a 'different' now occurring 'again'. 

Edited March 2, 2022 by Mason Riggle

[Someone here]

@Mason Riggle it's not silly. It's based on a well known theory in modern physics. 

That there are infinite parallel universes with all the possibility of your life 

What does this mean? Well, first of all it means you will be born at the same time and place as the last time. If you were a Aries last time, you'll be an Aries again. Your genetic code will also be very similar. Once again, you will have the same general features --- brown hair, green eyes, a tendency to be healthy, or on the contrary, a tendency to be sick often, and so on. You will also have the same mother, father, brothers and sisters, etc. And once again you will live in the same city, the same country, with the same monuments, history, and general society. All the "big" things repeat. Why? Because the forces that caused these things are very "big", and they will be around the next time to produce the same general effects.

P.S how do you explain deja vu ?

 

[Mason Riggle]

@Someone here I said it seems silly to me.  

"you will be born at the same time and place as the last time"

What does 'the same time as last time' mean?  Is 'last time' different from 'this time' or are they the 'same time'? 

Edited March 2, 2022 by Mason Riggle

[Someone here]

@Mason Riggle yes they are different but similar.

as far as you living another life, according to the theory of recurrence your next life will not be an exact replica of the current one, but it will be very similar. By this I mean that while incidental details might be different in your next life, all the "big" things and events which occurred in this life will repeat in the next.

[Mason Riggle]

@Someone here idk.. the problem is, if any tiny thing in 'my experience' changes, then 'I' have changed.   I'm not really sure how you make a distinction between 'incidental details' and 'the big events'.  

I guess you are imagining some reality where you have access to 'one version' of reality (here and now) among infinite 'versions' which 'could or do exist' in some 'other place and time'.. and you want to know if you might eventually experience every single one of these infinite alternatives to now, which may be very similar, or not so similar, but definitely not exactly the same as now. 

These are the types of questions that arise when there is duality between 'you' and 'that which is not you'.   There's this idea of a consistent and unchanging 'you' who exists 'separate from the moment' and who carries over from one moment to the next.   But this isn't the case. You are literally every part of this moment.   If 'the moment' is different, then 'you' are different. 

I can't even experience '5 minutes from now', because the "I" who I am now, doesn't exist 5 minutes from now.. that's some 'different me'.. with slightly longer hair, and memories of this conversation which the me who is writing this comment doesn't have. 

[Reciprocality]

Lets consider first that matter is the only substance that could be in the only possible consideration of a mediation of it; space and time.

 

Since it can not begin to exist from nothing it must either have always existed or fluctuated in its existence. Since we necessarily define existence as something that is conscious in its totality whether we know it or not (and whether it is or not), must therefore belong to the concept of infinity. And since either the fluctuating or the eternally existent substance must be infinite, then the total sum of physical dynamics as matter, were it to be considered as existent independent or dependent on our consciousness must therefore itself be conscious. (as to say the only way it could be existent without being conscious is if existence transcends consciousness itself, the speculation of which is futile)

 

Eternal recurrence is predicated upon physical matter as it unfolds in the absolute consciousness to be limited in possible variations, for the argument were it not limited like that is simple: Infinite variation so far as we consider it in in a 1 dimensional time frame makes your consciousness wherever it happens on that time-frame singular and finite thus never to recur. 

The very recurrence would actually force us to define physical variations as limited, especially so if you explicitly involve causality in the deduction though implicitly you are forced to.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Reciprocality

[Someone here]

@Mason Riggle all of this does not at all apply to all the details of your life, all the "incidental" things which happened the last time around which were not caused by these big cosmic forces, but rather were caused by small, trivial forces. These events may not repeat due to the incidental and random nature of the forces involved. What does this mean? It means that the next time around, when you are walking to school again, just like you did in your past life, you may take 875 steps to get there, rather than 876. Or you might notice a leaf falling from a tree this time on your walk, whereas last time you did not notice it, either because you just weren't aware of it last time or perhaps because the last time it fell 10 seconds earlier or later and you couldn't have seen it. Or perhaps in the last life, when you were playing monopoly with some friends, at a certain point you rolled an 11, whereas in this life you happen to roll a 12, and so on. The key to differentiating whether or not something will repeat or not is mainly based on the nature of the forces involved, whether they are "big" (like the Sun rising in the East), or "small" (like a slighly different force and direction of a die being rolled in a monopoly game).

[Someone here]

10 minutes ago, Reciprocality said:

Eternal recurrence is predicated upon physical matter as it unfolds in the absolute consciousness to be limited in possible variations, for the argument were it not limited like that is simple: Infinite variation so far as we consider it in in a 1 dimensional time frame makes your consciousness wherever it happens on that time-frame singular and finite thus never to recur. 

The very recurrence would actually force us to define physical variations as limited, especially so if you explicitly involve causality in the deduction though implicitly you are forced to.

Not being an expert I get confused with this side of QM. On one hand we have "many worlds" envisioned as bubbles of spacetime in hyperspace. It's believed that there are potentially an infinite number of these "bubble universes". Then there's parallel universes suggested as an answer to the double slit experiment. Some posit that the unrealised potential of waves that are rendered tangible by observation don't disappear but move into alternate realities.

Either way, infinite possibilities need not necessarily mean that all possibilities are realised. Many possibilities will still be on the universe's "to do list" when it degenerates into black holes an then near nothingness. The chances of the universe reproducing an exact replica of you are extremely remote and the chances are that it will run through many other more likely permutations before getting to the "repeat Therammo" and "repeat Greta" possibilities.

[Mason Riggle]

@Someone here I'm still not sure how you differentiate between 'big' and 'small' which are relative terms.   If I lived this whole life, and then I was born anew with very similar 'circumstances', but not exactly the same, then it would be a 'similar' me, and not the 'same' me who was born, because the 'me' who I am, is defined by 'everything that isn't me'...  

Am I the same as 'my hair' or is 'my hair' something different than me that 'belongs to me'? If I cut my hair, am I the same 'me' I was when I had long hair or am I now different?

Do you see how changing the things that 'aren't me' changes 'me' because they aren't really two different things? 

Edited March 2, 2022 by Mason Riggle

[Someone here]

8 minutes ago, Mason Riggle said:

@Someone here I'm still not sure how you differentiate between 'big' and 'small' which are relative terms.   If I lived this whole life, and then I was born anew with very similar 'circumstances', but not exactly the same, then it would be a 'similar' me, and not the 'same' me who was born, because the 'me' who I am, is defined by 'everything that isn't me'...  

Am I the same as 'my hair' or is 'my hair' something different than me that 'belongs to me'? If I cut my hair, am I the same 'me' I was when I had long hair or am I now different?

Do you see how changing the things that 'aren't me' changes 'me' because they aren't really two different things? 

Look ..it's so simple but you are making it unnecessary complicated.

if you are playing a game with your friends, and roll a 6, the idea here is that in a so called "parallel universe" a 2,3,4, and 5 were actually rolled, but our collective awareness only realized one of the 6 possibilities due to its limitation of only being able to perceive three dimensions of space at a time. If our awareness were able to perceive more than three dimensions of space, then we could realize all 6 possibilities at once. But in no "parallel world" is a 7 or 8, or a -2.5 rolled.

So the idea here is that all of those other "yous" already exist. They don't have to be created, they already are, both those said to be in the past as well as those said to be in the future. They all exist concurrently, simultaneously, and eternally, the only question is whether or not our awareness will ever realize them or not. In this model, the past, present, and future all simultaneously exist, as well as all possible pasts and futures

[Vibroverse]

Yes, no, yes, no, yes, no. 

[WokeBloke]

I thought about this alot. First you have far too many beliefs and assumptions about the nature of reality that we have absolutely no access to.

Think about it like this. Every step/action you take only takes you further away from where you are now. There is no way for you to return to this moment eternally unless you 

1. Exist forever

2. Have the ability to recreate this moment

3. Have the desire at the end of your life to recreate this life since you only do what you desire.

[Mason Riggle]

@Someone here I totally get what you're asking, but from my perspective, it's you who is making things unnecessarily complicated.  

I'm trying to get you to see reality in such a way that instead of looking for answers to your question, you simply stop asking it because it no longer makes any sense to ask.  

You want to know, "Is it the case that infinite versions of reality exist now and 'awareness' is only 'aware of' one version at a time, but given an infinite amount of time 'awareness' will experience ALL versions?"  Perhaps it's like that. If that's the case, in 'this version of reality' 'this version of me' can't tell if that's how it is. 

[Someone here]

15 minutes ago, WokeBloke said:

I thought about this alot. First you have far too many beliefs and assumptions about the nature of reality that we have absolutely no access to.

Think about it like this. Every step/action you take only takes you further away from where you are now. There is no way for you to return to this moment eternally unless you 

1. Exist forever

2. Have the ability to recreate this moment

3. Have the desire at the end of your life to recreate this life since you only do what you desire.

From this, it appears to me that indeed you are referring to the so called "bang-crunch" model. If so, I see no reason to think that any "new" Universe would be an exact, or even necessarily a rough, replica of the current one. It may even be possible that a "new", or rather the "next", Universe may even have some fundamentally different laws than this one. So I would not base any idea of eternal recurrence on such a model, and, in fact, the original idea had nothing whatsoever to do with any contemporary cosmological models.