Asklemmy

45956 readers

1983 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

What Pseudoscience do you Believe? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

165 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Came across a list of pseudosciences and was fun seeing where im woo woo.

Lunar effect – the belief that the full Moon influences human and animal behavior.

Ley Lines

Accupressure/puncture

Ayurveda

Body Memory

Faith healing

Anyway, list too long to read. I guess Im quite the nonscientific woowoomancer. How about you? What pseudoscience do you believe? Also I believe nearly every stone i find was an ancient indian stone. Also manifesting and or prayer to manipulate via subconscious aligning the future. oh and the ability to subconsciously deeply understand animals, know the future, etc

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm with this one. It feels less magical than "brains make consciousness happen."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah it just makes sense. Everything has a little bit of consciousness in it, even subatomic particles would have a non-zero amount. But the consciousness of these particles then combine in complex and nonlinear ways. Something like, IDK, the combined consciousness of a collection of particles is proportional to their individual level taken to the n power, where n is equal to the number of particle interactions. Totally guessing on the actual math, but it would be something complex and nonlinear like that. If you could quantify consciousness, and humans had a measure of 1 consciousness unit, then the consciousness of an electron would be something like 1/Googolplex consciousness units. Something insane like that. Technically nonzero, but so small as to make an amoeba look like a intellectual giant.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

I would agree depending on how you see physics. I think there is no smallest unit, no fundamental, infinite big and small. So though size comparisons make relative sense, they don't describe relative complexity.