>>14399168He’s atheist and a realist. Scientists are cozy and comfortable with the idea that things exist and the mind has no affect on reality. As if the mind doesn’t make a subjective reality.
I think it’s stupid and is FAITH. Our minds are small. They can be bigger. Imagine the biggest brain. We aren’t close to that. So I have no idea what’s so special about the mind that it’s immune to flaws in determining fundamental realities.
Sure, our math is good, it works to and extent. But we never know if it’s perfect. Our axioms are built exactly on that: faith. Call it understanding, truth, etc, but at the end of the day you are a small man, a small speck, and an arrogant faggot who thinks the mind is impenetrable to mistakes, even at the fundamental/axiomatic level.
Even he says “yes our science is precise by 10^14”. This sounds like a crank, but it’s not: what about 10^15? He has a precise number. But if there is more than a number x, then clearly the theory isn’t perfect. Neither is his “understanding”. The issue is that our systems are faith based, faith of our understanding of the world and subjective mind. It would be understandable to say “it’s approximate to, at bare minimum 10^14 power, but it could be higher.” THEN it would be reasonable. But if you know for sure that the approximation only goes so deep to a finite number due tot he theory itself (not the methods used to show how precise it is, like the computer CAN calculate beyond 10^14), there’s clearly an error and room for improvement.
So yeah. Most STEM majors will get triggered because they’re narcissistic retards who can get their head out of humanity’s ass.
(Also: I say 10^14, because Penrose said this himself, either in this video, or the debate with William Craig concerning the accuracy of the theory of relativity).
