
The science of “vibes” shows how everything is connected - akeck
https://qz.com/1490276/the-science-of-vibes-shows-how-everything-is-connected/
======
PavlovsCat
> [L]iterally every life form and every speck of dust down to the smallest
> subatomic particle is influenced by the world through the various forces
> that act upon it. An electron is influenced by charged particles close
> enough to have an impact, and from objects that exert a gravitational
> pull—and the electron behaves accordingly. To exist, to be in the universe,
> means that every particle in the universe feels some pull and push from the
> various forces around it—otherwise it simply doesn’t exist. Thus, the
> electron perceives, as I have defined this term, and the electron is a
> subject.

I once came to the conclusion that the only true statement I could make is
that "there is something", or that "something is going on"... other than that,
it's very hard to say where one "thing" starts and another ends, if there even
are separate things. At the very least, that even just gravity affects
_everything_ (that is affected by it at all, that is), at any distance (so far
as we know?), no matter how weakly, always struck me as quite the underrated
fact.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18689562](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18689562)

For some reason, Nneka comes to my mind. And because everything is everything,
I'll just post it. Maybe it'll save someone.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BvvLGoZHs8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BvvLGoZHs8)

------
kstenerud
This is so hand-wavey, I'm a bit disappointed to see it on hn.

To the article in question, yes, things can adopt sympathetic vibration, but
extrapolating that to high level consciousness is a Herculean stretch.

That they haven't even come up with neural imaging experiments is very
telling.

------
carapace
Old wine in a new bottle. And a bit of tail-chasing.

Reading Hunt's paper it seems he's not even trying to address the Hard Problem
of Consciousness:

> But why, sceptics will object, is all matter inherently experiential? Some
> facts are simply brute facts. There are no additional answers below the
> level of brute facts and we just accept this and see where these brute facts
> take us. I postulate, based on the arguments fleshed out here, that the
> stuff of the universe is inherently experiential. This theory leads to an
> intellectually satisfying world-view as well as greater compassion for the
> universe around us and all of its inhabit- ants. In this case, it is no
> tragedy, by any means, to accept that all things are inherently experiential
> and that experience complexifies as form complexifies. It is, rather, a very
> satisfying path between the dogma of traditional theism and the more recent
> dogma of crude materialism.

So, what's the point?[1]

Here's Albert Einstein: "A human being is a part of the whole called by us
universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his
thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical
delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us,
restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons
nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening
our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of
nature in its beauty."

[1] Will this help me build a GAI robot? Will it help me be more
compassionate?

\- - - -

Do a video search for "metronome synchronization"... E.g.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v5eBf2KwF8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v5eBf2KwF8)
Sooooooo satisfying......

------
based2
[http://cleamc11.vub.ac.be/MACRBOOK.html](http://cleamc11.vub.ac.be/MACRBOOK.html)

------
lbj
A lawyer/philosopher team up with a psychologist to provide a physical theory
of how everything is connected.

tl;dr: speculation

~~~
MPSimmons
Yeah, there's absolutely no science in this article.

