Tulpae experiment - 10 subjects needed

[Leaf]

While it is true that intersubjectivity (psychological relation between people) is often passed through a physical medium (like this text conveys the meaning of my thoughts on this forum), it does not mean that we are physically connected. The theory behind this experiment is fundamentally flawed because you misunderstand conscious and the human being as separate yet integral to its world. For you, the conscious is merely the result of neurons and chemicals in the brain which transmit information that enters and exits the system through perception and action respectively, often in the form of some physical phenomenon. This suggests that tulpae can be projected through a common physical medium and shared by two people.

 

Lets back up a bit and consider the human conscious and to some extent a tulpa conscious. I like to break it down into a few distinguishable parts. First, the conscious can be used to grasp an object from the world, what we all like to call experience. Second, it can differentiate itself from what is grasped, which allows for identification of the object and is commonly known as self-conscious. Finally, this differentiation allows for the existence of self, which drives conscious on the quest for knowledge.

 

If that made no sense, let us consider transmission of conscious through a physical medium. The energy that allows for thought may arguably be transferred through various forms until it ends up on a physical medium, but to say that energy could possibly retain the information from my brain through countless changes in form is no less than absurd. Then to consider that the information could be reprocessed back to the original thought from a physical medium in the form of energy, well, I thought I was crazy.

[Faust]

But if we use a quantum vector engine before initializing quantum entanglement, the vector engine would outweigh the vacuum, allowing communication via quantum entanglement be possible.

 

Science.

Incorrect, that would violate the No-communication theorem.

---

While it is true that intersubjectivity (psychological relation between people) is often passed through a physical medium (like this text conveys the meaning of my thoughts on this forum), it does not mean that we are physically connected. The theory behind this experiment is fundamentally flawed because you misunderstand conscious and the human being as separate yet integral to its world. For you, the conscious is merely the result of neurons and chemicals in the brain which transmit information that enters and exits the system through perception and action respectively, often in the form of some physical phenomenon. This suggests that tulpae can be projected through a common physical medium and shared by two people.

 

Lets back up a bit and consider the human conscious and to some extent a tulpa conscious. I like to break it down into a few distinguishable parts. First, the conscious can be used to grasp an object from the world, what we all like to call experience. Second, it can differentiate itself from what is grasped, which allows for identification of the object and is commonly known as self-conscious. Finally, this differentiation allows for the existence of self, which drives conscious on the quest for knowledge.

 

If that made no sense, let us consider transmission of conscious through a physical medium. The energy that allows for thought may arguably be transferred through various forms until it ends up on a physical medium, but to say that energy could possibly retain the information from my brain through countless changes in form is no less than absurd. Then to consider that the information could be reprocessed back to the original thought from a physical medium in the form of energy, well, I thought I was crazy.

 

I'm not saying that you would have the "same" tulpa, or at least the same consciousness, but studying the transfer of information through a medium relating to the creation of a tulpa that I can relate to my notion of "natural" tulpae.